Judgments - Compensation
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS Vs. JAGJIT SINGH AND ORS
Any determination under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, must proceed sequentially. First, the factum of an Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, must be clearly established. The said Award must predate the commencement of the Act, i.e., Full Judgment
M/S. COMPETENT AUTOMOBILES CO. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
The said Award must predate the commencement of the Act, i.e., 01.01.2014., by at least five years (or more), ie., the Award must have been passed on or before 01.01.2009. This having been established, if possession is found to not have been taken, or compensation not paid, then the proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed. Thereafter, the Full Judgment
BATHIDA DEV. AUTH. FORMERLY KNOWN AS (PUDA) Vs. IQBAL SINGH AND ORS
This Appeal assails the Order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, which had allowed the Writ Petitions before it, and declared that the acquisition had lapsed for the reason that the possession had not been taken and compensation, too, not paid. This is sufficient ground for protection under the provision of Section 24(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The Appeal is dismissed in the above terms. Full Judgment
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA & ORS.
The question to be considered is whether the High Court is justified in awarding compensation of Rs.55,00,000/- without any discussion and computation. The approach of the High Court cannot be said to be justified in such cases of injury. It is necessary to make computation of compensation to be awarded on account of pecuniary Full Judgment
PRAVEENBHAI S KHAMBHAYATA Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD AND ORS.
The insurance policy of a public service vehicle is deemed to cover an employee engaged in the said vehicle and the liability of the insurance company to pay compensation for the death or injuries sustained by the workman. Payment of compensation for the death of workman or injuries sustained by the workman is limited to the liability arising in the Employers Compensation Act, 1923. The Full Judgment
STATE OF M.P. VERSUS MEHTAAB
- It is the duty of the Court to award just sentence to a convict against whom charge is proved. While every mitigating or aggravating circumstance may be given due weight, mechanical reduction of sentence to the period already undergone cannot be appreciated. Sentence has to be fair not only to the accused but also to the victim and Full Judgment
M/S CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN SERVICES Vs. DELHI DEVT.AUTH
Once it is held that even in absence of specific evidence, the respondent could be held to have suffered loss on account of breach of contract, and it is entitled to compensation to the extent of loss suffered, it is for the appellant to show that stipulated damages are by way of penalty - The Full Judgment
JITENDRA KHIMSHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS. Vs. KASAM DAUD KUMBHAR & ORS.
Even assuming Jayvantiben Jitendra Trivedi was not self- employed doing embroidery and tailoring work, the fact remains that she was a housewife and a home maker. It is hard to monetize the domestic work done by a house-mother. The services of the mother/wife is available 24 hours and her duties are never fixed. Courts have Full Judgment
RAMAN Vs. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LT.& ORS
THE MANAGER(FACTORY) MAHARASHTRA STATE COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. & A Vs. SURESH S/O DADARAO GADGE
M/S MAGNUM PROMOTERS P.LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
RAM KISHAN & ORS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
KALA DEVI & ORS. Vs. BHAGWAN DAS CHAUHAN & ORS.
Kashmir Singh Versus State of Haryana & Ors
Bsnl Versus Bhurumal
It is trite law that when the termination is found to be illegal because of non-payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under Section 25-F of theIndustrial Disputes Act, even after reinstatement, it is always open to the management to terminate the services of that employee by paying him the retrenchment compensation. Since such a workman was working on daily wage basis and even afterhe is reinstated, he has no right to seek regularization. Thus when he Full Judgment