Chhattisgarh High Court holds insurers liable to indemnify third parties even if policy was issued post-accident, provided issuance occurred on same day, reinforcing statutory duty under MV Act.
Madras High Court rules that burden of proving contributory negligence lies with the insurer, setting aside 50% reduction in compensation for lack of evidence.
Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that absence of fitness certificate does not exonerate insurer from liability under Motor Vehicles Act when policy contains no such condition.
Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that delay in lodging FIR cannot defeat motor accident compensation claims if claimant demonstrates valid reasons like hospitalization.
Kerala High Court holds insurers liable only for permitted passengers in overloaded vehicles, directing proportional payout of highest award and recovery from owner.
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.
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.
Kerala High Court clarifies that compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities is independent of disability percentage and must be awarded based on injury severity and lifestyle impact.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that in car-motorcycle collisions, contributory negligence of the two-wheeler rider should not exceed 25%, reinforcing equitable liability allocation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Tripura High Court holds that mere presence of pillion riders on a motorcycle does not establish contributory negligence in accident claims; compensation restored in full.
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.
Chhattisgarh High Court affirms that motor accident compensation cases require proof on preponderance of probability, not beyond reasonable doubt, reinforcing insurer liability despite disputed facts.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that future prospects and consortium damages must be awarded in motor accident claims involving minor deceased, clarifying calculation methodology under Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi.