Quick Summary: The Bombay High Court has increased the compensation for Chandrabhagabai Narayan Patil and her son after a road accident claim. The court found mistakes in the original calculation and adjusted the amount accordingly.
Chandrabhagabai Narayan Patil and her son Vijay asked for more money after a road accident took the life of Narayan Patil. The case was heard by Judge R. M. Joshi at the Bombay High Court. They argued that the original decision used the wrong method to figure out their compensation.
"The wrong method was used," said their lawyer, Mr. S. H. Tripathi.
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., represented by Mr. A. A. Gatne, disagreed with the appeal. They said the original decision followed the rules at the time and shouldn't be changed.
Narayan Patil died in a vehicle accident on November 1, 2001. There was no disagreement about the accident's details or the vehicle's involvement. The main issue was how the compensation was calculated based on his income and age.
The original decision set Narayan Patil's monthly income at Rs. 2,500 and used a method of multiplying by 6. However, the court found that the correct method should be multiplying by 11, based on the Supreme Court's guidelines in the Sarla Varma case.
"The right method for age 51 is multiplying by 11," the court noted, referencing the Sarla Varma case.
The court also thought about future possibilities, adding 10% to the income, as per the Pranay Sethi case. This adjustment led to a new compensation amount of Rs. 2,90,400.
The court agreed to increase the compensation partly, confirming other parts of the compensation but raising the total amount. If the insurance company delays payment beyond eight weeks, the amount will earn 7% interest each year.
"The family is entitled to get Rs. 2,90,400," concluded Judge R. M. Joshi.
