Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

Supreme Court Restores Compensation in Motor Accident Claim: Upholds School Leaving Certificate as Age Proof

Supreme Court Restores Compensation in Motor Accident Claim: Upholds School Leaving Certificate as Age Proof


In a recent ruling on October 24, 2024, the Supreme Court of India revisited a motor accident compensation case, Saroj & Ors. vs. IFFCO-Tokio General Insurance Co. & Ors., concerning the tragic death of Silak Ram in a 2015 motorcycle accident. The judgment addressed two key aspects: the method of calculating compensation and the authenticity of documents for age determination. The Court upheld the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s (MACT) original award, which the Punjab and Haryana High Court had significantly reduced.


Background of the Case


On August 4, 2015, Silak Ram was fatally injured in a motorcycle accident. His family subsequently filed a compensation claim with the MACT, Rohtak, which awarded ₹19,35,400 plus 7.5% interest. The insurance company appealed, and the High Court reduced the award to ₹9,22,336, citing discrepancies in income estimation and the deceased's age. Dissatisfied, the family approached the Supreme Court to reinstate the original compensation.


Supreme Court’s Key Observations


The Supreme Court addressed two primary issues in its ruling:


1. Documentary Proof for Age Determination: The claimant family presented two documents as age proof: the Aadhar Card (indicating birth in 1969) and a School Leaving Certificate (indicating birth in 1970). The High Court had based its calculation on the Aadhar Card’s date, assigning a multiplier of 13. The Supreme Court, however, recognized the School Leaving Certificate as the more reliable document based on statutory guidelines and established precedent, confirming the deceased’s age as 45, meriting a multiplier of 14.


2. Income Calculation and Applicable Rate of Interest: The High Court had recalculated Silak Ram’s monthly income at ₹5,886 using standard minimum wage rates, instead of the District Commissioner (DC) rates applied by the MACT, which assessed the income at ₹9,000. The Supreme Court upheld the MACT's figure of ₹9,000, highlighting the deceased's agricultural assets and equipment, including a tractor and JCB machine, supporting a higher income estimation.


Rationale Behind the Supreme Court’s Decision


The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court had overstepped by substituting its view over the MACT without sufficient grounds. The judgment stated:

- Respecting Original Findings: Appellate courts are advised not to replace the trial court's views unless there is evidence of perversity or illegality. The MACT’s decision to use DC rates was deemed appropriate, given the deceased’s agricultural assets.

- Verification of Age: Referring to precedents and statutory guidelines under the Juvenile Justice Act and several high court rulings, the Supreme Court asserted that Aadhar Cards should not be taken as definitive age proof. Instead, School Leaving Certificates, which hold statutory recognition, should take precedence.


Enhanced Compensation and Interest Rate


After reassessing the compensation, the Supreme Court set the total compensation amount at ₹14,41,500 with an enhanced interest rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing. However, the Court rounded off the compensation to ₹15,00,000 in the interest of justice.


Implications of the Judgment


This ruling emphasizes the following principles:

- School Leaving Certificates are preferred as age proof over Aadhar Cards, given statutory precedence.

- Appellate Courts should respect lower court decisions unless substantial evidence warrants modification.

- The decision reinforces a just approach to compensation awards in motor accident claims, considering the financial needs of victims’ families.


This judgment serves as a landmark in motor accident claims, clarifying compensation calculations, authenticating document standards, and prioritizing victim families' welfare in the appellate process.

Location: Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Image
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager  Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores  The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista , a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.   Details of the Case The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.   The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:   - Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.   - Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were tr...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more