Skip to content
-
Subscribe to our newsletter & never miss our best posts. Subscribe Now!
  • Face book
  • Instagram
PLEAD & PREJUDICE PLEAD & PREJUDICE PLEAD & PREJUDICE

Beyond the Brief

PLEAD & PREJUDICE PLEAD & PREJUDICE PLEAD & PREJUDICE

Beyond the Brief

  • Home
  • Supreme Court Today
  • High Courts Today
  • Judiciary Mock-Test
  • AIBE Exam Mock Test
  • Editor Coloumn

About This Site

This may be a good place to introduce yourself and your site or include some credits.

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Stays Criminal Defamation Trial Against Rahul Gandhi Over Remarks Against PM Modi
  • Tripura HC Reverses Cheque Bounce Acquittal: Mere Doubt Over Lender’s Financial Capacity Cannot Save Accused
  • Section 43 vs Section 42 of NDPS Act: Tripura HC Upholds Conviction in NDPS Case
  • Tripura HC Case Raises Questions Over Non-Deposit of Employees’ EPF and ESI Contributions
  • Bengal Voters Move Supreme Court Against SIR After Names Deleted From Electoral Rolls

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Find Us

Address
123 Main Street
New York, NY 10001

Hours
Monday–Friday: 9:00AM–5:00PM
Saturday & Sunday: 11:00AM–3:00PM

  • Home
  • Supreme Court Today
  • High Courts Today
  • Judiciary Mock-Test
  • AIBE Exam Mock Test
  • Editor Coloumn
Subscribe
Close

Search

Uncategorized

Tripura HC Enhances Accident Compensation, Says Skilled Workman’s Income Must Be Assessed at Rupees 12,000

September 29, 2026 2 Min Read
0

The Tripura High Court has enhanced compensation awarded to an injured accident victim after finding that the monthly income assessed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was lower than the notional income prescribed for skilled workers.

The case arose from a motor vehicle accident on February 4, 2021, involving a bus bearing registration number TR-01-B-1397 and a truck bearing registration number AS-01-DD-8999. The claimant, Sri Bikash Debnath, sustained injuries in the accident and subsequently filed a claim before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, West Tripura, in T.S. (MAC) No. 218 of 2022.

The Tribunal had awarded Rupees 9,47,000 as compensation by its judgment dated February 6, 2026. Dissatisfied with the amount, Debnath approached the High Court under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking enhancement of the compensation. He was working as a mason, which was treated as skilled labour.

Before the High Court, the main issue was the assessment of his monthly income. The Tribunal had taken his monthly income as Rupees 10,000. However, the High Court noted that its notification dated August 4, 2023 had fixed the notional monthly income of a skilled workman at Rupees 12,000. Since the claimant was a skilled mason, the Court held that his income had to be assessed in accordance with the notified amount.

The Court also considered the claimant’s assessed disability of 45 per cent while calculating the loss of future income. Applying the revised income and a multiplier of 15, the Court calculated the loss of future income at Rupees 9,72,000. The other amounts awarded towards medical expenses, special diet, attendant charges, transportation, doctor’s fees and pain and suffering were left unchanged.

As a result, the High Court enhanced the total compensation from Rupees 9,47,000 to Rupees 11,09,000. The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rupees 1,62,000 along with accrued interest before the Tribunal within one month from receipt of the order.

The Court also directed that the amount already deposited, including money kept in a five-year fixed deposit, be released to the claimant. The condition requiring the fixed deposit was relaxed, allowing him to withdraw and utilise the entire amount.

The judgment, delivered on September 24, 2026 in MAC App. No. 78 of 2026, reinforces that compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act must be calculated on the basis of the applicable notified income when the claimant falls within a specified category of skilled workmen.

Download the order: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12fVpiQ-0dTxAbrpFdWEY4ek8-zjJgDZo/view?usp=sharing

Author

Plead and Prejudice Network

Follow Me
Other Articles
Previous

SC Collegium Recommends Elevation of Gujarat, Delhi and Telangana Chief Justices as Supreme Court Judges

Next

Dying Declaration Need Not Be Corroborated as an Absolute Rule: Tripura HC Upholds Life Sentence in Pregnant Woman’s Burning Death

No Comment! Be the first one.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

For more information

Stay updated with the latest legal news, judgments, and court developments. Follow us on social media for regular updates. Plead & Prejudice — Beyond the Brief.

Search

Contact Us

Have a legal news tip, query, or feedback? Email us or send us a DM on our social media platforms. We’d be happy to hear from you.

About This Site

Plead & Prejudice brings you concise and timely updates on Indian courts, judgments, and legal developments.

Beyond the Brief.

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Stays Criminal Defamation Trial Against Rahul Gandhi Over Remarks Against PM Modi
  • Tripura HC Reverses Cheque Bounce Acquittal: Mere Doubt Over Lender’s Financial Capacity Cannot Save Accused
  • Section 43 vs Section 42 of NDPS Act: Tripura HC Upholds Conviction in NDPS Case
  • Tripura HC Case Raises Questions Over Non-Deposit of Employees’ EPF and ESI Contributions
  • Bengal Voters Move Supreme Court Against SIR After Names Deleted From Electoral Rolls

Archives

  • October 2026 (17)
  • September 2026 (29)
  • August 2026 (5)

Contact Us

chiefeditor@pleadandprejudice.com

Copyright 2026 — PLEAD & PREJUDICE. All rights reserved.