CiteTEXT
...Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) v. Delhi Transport Corporation - (2009) 6 SCC 121, it ought to have applied multiplier of 11 whereas...judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, where deceased is in age block of 51-55 years, multiplier of 11 ought to have been applied. Here in present case age of deceased has been assessed to...be 55 years by learned Tribunal and therefore in view of judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, multiplier of 11 should have been applied by learned Tribunal instead of 9. Learned Tribunal has...
...Sarla Verma (Smt.) v. Delhi Transport Corporation - (2009) 6 SCC 121, learned Tribunal should have applied multiplier of 18 at the admitted age of deceased ins....Learned counsel for respondents opposed the appeal and argued that judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, cannot be applied in old cases. His further contention is that deceased was a milk vendor and th...assessed notional income at Rs. 15,000/-. In view of judgment of Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, multiplier of 18 is applied instead of 17, looking to age of deceased who was 24 years of age at relevant point...
....9. According to the claimants, the deceased was a Government servant and he died at the age of 54. As per the decision in Sarla Verma, multiplier would 11 had the deceased had 4 years of...reason and evidence on record, the tribunal or the court shall not apply split multiplier in routine course and should apply multiplier as per the decision in Sarla Verma. The issue came up for...servant and he died at the age of 54 and when he was having another 4 years of service before his retirement, however, the tribunal wrongly applied multiplier ‘11’ and hence, it has to be reduced...
...Kumari v. Madan Mohan 2013 9 SCC 65 and the formula set out in Sarla Verma is the correct one. The Supreme Court held that absent any specific reason and evidence on record, split multipliers should not be used and, further, the...be used is the one set out in Sarla Verma. In paragraph 36 of Reshma Kumari, and which was quoted in paragraph 31 of Puttama, the Supreme Court in fact obseverd that not only should the Sarla Verma ...retirement, the multiplier used by the Tribunal, relying on the decision in Sarla Varma, ought not to have been taken into account. He submits that a much lower multiplier should have been used. We...
...dependency at Rs. 1,75,860/-.
Admittedly, learned tribunal has applied an incorrect multiplier which is dehors the law laid down in case of Sarla Verma. Multiplier of 18 will be...Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and has been affirmed thereafter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in...learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 2., Fatehpur on three grounds namely, age of the deceased was 22 years and therefore, in place of multiplier of 10 as has...
...left over service and by applying multiplier ‘8’ for the remaining period, awarded Rs. 9,60,000/-. As per the decision in Sarla Verma, multiplier ‘7’ ought to have been applied for the remaining period....7. On the other hand, Mr. T. Selvakumaran contended that split multiplier ought to have applied in this case, by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in...Court observed that the reasons have to be assigned for applying the theory of split multiplier. Admittedly, the deceased was having 2 years and 3 months service before her retirement and after...
...decision in Sarla Verma, multiplier would be 15, but the tribunal applied multiplier 16 and awarded Rs.24,96,000/- and by applying proper multiplier 15, the loss of income is worked out at Rs.23,40,000...
...
4/6
the case of Sarla Verma, multiplier was fixed at 17. By adopting the proper deduction, the Loss of income was assessed at Rs...
...of age and has 27 years of service left, the multiplier is not 28 years but keeping in view the judgment of this Court in Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 12...prospects are to be added to the sum on the percentage basis and “income” means actual income less the tax paid. The multiplier has already been fixed in Sarla Verma...multipliers is clearly erroneous and run counter to the judgment of this Court in Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680, affirming the judgment in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121....
..., (2017) 16 SCC 680 held that the standards fixed in Sarla Verma (supra) would provide guidance for appropriate deduction towards personal and living expenses, and affir..., the Court in Sarla Verma (supra), prepared a chart for fixing the applicable multiplier in accordance with the age of the deceased, after considering the judgments in...43. The Court in Sarla Verma (supra) held:—“42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in column (4) of the...
...applied the multiplier of 13 in a case where the age of the deceased was 35 years at the time of the accident.25. In Sarla Verma v. DTC...in the Second Schedule Table and also observed that application of Table may result in incongruities. Paras 35 and 36 of the Report are as follows: (Sarla Verma case (...236 and U.P SRTC v. Krishna Bala (2006) 6 SCC 249, this Court in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 S...
...50% of the income and applying the multiplier of 17 as per the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC...13 was to be applied according to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121, but the learned Tribunal has applied th...by applying multiplier of 13 which was against the law laid down by this Court in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121.11. The learned co...
...Verma, multiplier 18 has to be applied for the age group of 15 to 20 years and 20
9
to 25 years. Therefore in...by the Tribunal is on a lower side and the multiplier applied by the Tribunal namely
6
multiplier 14 is not proper...and that multiplier 18 ought to have been applied in the case.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and respondents.
7...
...a multiplier of 24 years.30. In Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 this Court held that the multiplier should be.... In the said case this Court held:( & 91, paras 35-37 & 43)“35. We have already noticed the Table prepared in Sarla Verma (2009) ...Table has been prepared in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 having regard to the three decisions of this Court, namely, Susamma Thomas (...
...compensation awarded, split the multiplier and used two different multiplicants. The Supreme Court noted that the view in Sarla Verma has been approved by a larger three-Judge bench in Reshma Kumari v...Madan Mohan,5and the formula set out in Sarla Verma is the correct one. The Supreme
3
2001 ACJ 134
...the one set out in Sarla Verma. In paragraph 36 of Reshma Kumari, and which was quoted in paragraph 31 of Puttama, the Supreme Court in fact obseverd that not only should the Sarla ...
...Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation , the correct multiplier is 11 but the Tribunal has erroneously taken the multiplier 9. 9. The Tribunal, in paragraph 21 of..., Sarla Verma is a subsequent judgment on the point. Therefore, in the light of the judgment in Sarla Verma, multiplier 11 has to be applied for the purpose of calculation of compensation...its judgment, though referred to the multiplier table in II Schedule, has committed an error by applying multiplier 9 to the age of the appellant who was 55 years by the date of accident. No doubt...
....8. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was 55 years old by the date of accident, and as per Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corpor...Verma is a subsequent judgment on the point. Therefore, in the light of the judgment in Sarla Verma, multiplier ‘11’ has to be applied for the purpose of calculation of compensation...judgment, though referred to the multiplier table in II Schedule, has committed an error by applying multiplier ‘9’ to the age of the appellant who was 55 years by the date of accident. No doubt, Sarla...
...Tribunal by filing Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 676 of 2005 before the High Court of Judicature of Madras. The High Court referred to the decisions of this Court including Sarla Verma v. DTC (....”9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants relied upon the judgment of this Court in Sarla Verma case (2009) 6...made as personal and living expenses as per the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma case (2009) 6 SCC 121 extracted above. The first question is determined accordingly...
...restricted to one-third and contribution to the family will be taken as two-third.”11. As regards selection of multiplier, in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121, this Court on consideration of the earl...deceased was not married, we are satisfied that the principle stated in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 that 50% should be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor may be applied. Seen thus, the annual loss of depend...would be about 54-55 years. As per the table prepared in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121, the multiplier of 11 would, therefore, be applicable. By multiplying the annual loss of dependency (Rs. 12000...
...applications under Section 166. In Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121, as has been noticed further in Reshma Kumari (...result in incongruities.10. The three-Judge Bench further apprised itself that in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 the Court had undertaken the e...as we are in full agreement with the view in Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121.”...