Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that in MV Act claims, preponderance of probability governs liability; failure to produce insurer's investigator shifts burden decisively to respondent.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that unlisted witnesses in criminal cases may testify in motor accident claims if cross-examination doesn't undermine credibility, applying preponderance of probability standard.
Punjab and Haryana High Court rules that income assessment in motor accident claims must be based on last drawn salary, excluding mechanical deductions from prior employment. Key takeaways for insurance litigation.
Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that 40% future prospects addition is mandatory for deceased under 35, and enhances loss of consortium and funeral expenses per Supreme Court precedents.
Madras High Court holds that contributory negligence cannot be inferred merely because a vehicle hits another from behind; burden lies on insurer to prove it.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that income tax deduction is not mandatory in motor accident compensation when deceased's income is on the borderline and statutory allowances offset tax liability.
Karnataka High Court holds that land compensation cannot be equalized across adjoining villages; market value must be determined by local transactions and guidance values.
Madhya Pradesh High Court clarifies that tribunals must apply 15 multiplier and 40% future prospects for 40-year-old claimants with 50% disability, per *Sarla Verma* and *Pranay Sethi*.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules that tribunals must assess notional income based on skill level of deceased, enhancing compensation for semi-skilled workers in motor accident claims.
Gujarat High Court holds insurers must pay third-party compensation even when driver lacks license, applying 'pay and recover' doctrine under Motor Vehicles Act.
Gujarat High Court holds that each legal heir is entitled to independent compensation for loss of consortium, overturning lump-sum awards in motor accident claims.
Madras High Court holds employer vicariously liable for driver's negligence when internal disciplinary action confirms fault, reinforcing principles of tort and compensation law.
Madras High Court clarifies that proof of negligence is mandatory in motor accident claims and FIR can be used as corroborative evidence under Section 157 of the Evidence Act.