Supreme Court of India Judgements

46855 Judgements hosted as on 02/09/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Accident

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.166—Accident—License—Photocopy of license was marked as exhibit-Once the license was proved by the driver and marked in evidence and without there being any objection by the Insurance Company, the Insurance company had no right to raise any objections about the admissibility and manner of proving the license at a later stage.

Jun 16, 2017 sclaw

2016(5) Law Herald (P&H) 3988 (SC) : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1897 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice J. Chalameswar  The Hon’ble Mr, Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre…

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166, 140 and 141—Accident—Compensation—In case of the death of an infant, there may have been no actual pecuniary benefit derived by its parents during the child’s life-time. But this will not necessarily bar the parent’s claim and prospective loss will find a valid claim

May 15, 2017 sclaw

  2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 2874 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta Civil Appeal No. 2479…

Accident

The truck driven by the respondent No. 2 almost came to the centre of the road and the appellant must have been put in a dilemma and in the agony of that moment, the appellant’s failure to swerve to the extreme left to the road did not amount to negligence. Thus, there was no contributory negligence on his part especially when the respondent No. 2, the truck driver had no case that the appellant was negligent. Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 – Section 110-B – Contributory negligence –

May 14, 2017 sclaw

(2002) ACJ 1720 : AIR 2002 SC 2864 : (2002) 6 JT 380 : (2002) 3 PLR 467 : (2002) 5 SCALE 493 : (2002) 6 SCC 455 : (2002)…

Accident

The negligence of the first respondent and the liability of the second respondent as the insurer are beyond dispute at the present juncture. The only arena is to figure out what should be the correct compensation awardable to the claimants – The Tribunal had awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the award but the High Court chose to curb it to 3% per annum.

May 12, 2017 sclaw

(1999) ACJ 1299 : (1998) 9 JT 191 : (1998) 8 SCC 421 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DR K.R. TANDON (MRS) — Appellant Vs. OM PRAKASH AND ANOTHER — Respondent…

Accident

Award of compensation – Appeal has been filed on behalf of the Karnataka State-Road Transport Corporation challenging the validity of the award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-V, Bangalore City in a motor accident case which has been affirmed by the High Court – The respondent filed a cross-objection and sought enhancement of the amount of compensation including the rate of interest.

May 12, 2017 sclaw

  (1999) ACJ 1278 : (1998) 9 JT 198 : (1998) 8 SCC 424 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION — Appellant Vs. R. SETHURAM AND ANOTHER…

You missed

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw
Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 39(d) and 43 — Equal pay for equal work — Contractual Assistant Professors performing identical duties as regularly appointed or ad-hoc Assistant Professors are entitled to the minimum pay scale of Assistant Professors.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw
State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Chapter I-A — Slum Rehabilitation Schemes — Preferential right of landowner to redevelop — Section 3B(4)(e) and Section 13(1) confer a preferential right on the landowner to redevelop a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area) — SRA can undertake redevelopment only if the landowner fails to come forward with a scheme within a reasonable time

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw
State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Sections 3C, 13, 14 — Waiver of preferential right — Waiver of landowner’s preferential right to redevelop requires clear and overt communication by the owner of intention not to exercise the right — Mere inaction or delay, particularly when the owner has consistently shown intent to redevelop, does not constitute waiver, especially if no invitation for redevelopment was issued.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw