#motor vehicle act

The Delhi High Court ruled that compensation for an unlawful End-of-Life Vehicle seizure cannot be claimed via a writ petition under Article 226 and must be pursued in a civil suit. This narrows writ jurisdiction and directs vehicle owners to ordinary civil remedies under the Motor Vehicle (Registration and Functions of Vehicle Scrapping Facility) Rules, 2021.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that claimants in motor accident cases cannot rely on speculative or unverified income assertions to calculate loss of future earnings. Only documented salary slips or authenticated employment records can form the basis for compensation, ensuring fairness and deterring inflated claims from unverified sources.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has directed a Rs. 65,000 enhancement in compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of income, imposing 9% interest from the date of filing - a clear signal that tribunals must apply Sarla Verma guidelines rigorously and account for inflation and delayed justice. This sets a binding precedent for claimants with permanent disabilities in central India, ensuring awards reflect real economic and emotional loss, not just nominal figures.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that contributory negligence cannot be established solely based on the statement of a vehicle owner who was not present at the accident scene. The court set aside the 50% deduction for contributory negligence, awarding the claimant Rs. 2,04,795 with 9% interest, reinforcing the evidentiary burden in motor accident claims.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that minimum wage notifications must be used as the income baseline for labourers in motor accident compensation claims, and 40% future prospect must be added. The judgment enhances compensation from Rs. 4.18 lakh to Rs. 7.02 lakh, setting a precedent for fairer compensation calculations under tort law.

Madras High Court rules that compensation for self-employed victims under the Motor Vehicles Act must be calculated based on actual economic activity, not rigid slabs. The Court affirmed a 25% future prospects addition and a multiplier of 14, even without documentary proof of income, setting a precedent for fairer dependency loss assessments in motor accident claims.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that insurance companies must pay compensation even if driver holds licence for different vehicle category, subject to recovery from owner/driver.

Bombay High Court holds that contributory negligence must be proven with evidence; mere non-use of helmet or vehicle position insufficient to apportion fault.

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.

Chhattisgarh High Court holds that notional income for deceased unskilled workers must align with state minimum wage, enhancing compensation in motor accident claims.