Bombay HC Conducts Emergency Hearing from CJ’s Residence as Court Staff Deployed for Elections  ||  Madras HC: Preventive Detention Laws are Draconian, Cannot be Used to Curb Dissent or Settle Politics  ||  HP HC: Mere Interest in a Project Cannot Justify Impleading a Non-Signatory in Arbitration  ||  J&K&L HC: Women Accused in Non-Bailable Offences Form a Distinct Class Beyond Sec 437 CrPC Rigour  ||  Bombay HC Restores IMAX’s Enforcement of Foreign Awards Against E-City, Applying Res Judicata  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of Bail For Man Accused of Assault Causing Miscarriage  ||  J&K&L High Court Invalidates Residence-Based Reservation, Citing Violation of Article 16  ||  Kerala HC Denies Parole to Life Convict in TP Chandrasekharan Murder Case For Cousin's Funeral  ||  High Court Grants Bail to J&K Bank Manager in Multi-Crore Loan Fraud Case, Emphasizing Bail As Rule  ||  J&K HC: Civil Remedy Alone Cannot Be Used To Quash Criminal Proceedings in Enso Tower Case    

The New India Assurance Company Limited v. Sunil Parsharam Garud - (High Court of Bombay) (29 Oct 2015)

Surviving spouse entitled to compensation even if both were earning members

Insurance

In a case regarding compensation for the death of a woman in a motor vehicle accident, the Bombay High Court determined that though the surviving husband was earning at the time of the incident, it could not be said that there was no loss of dependency. Aside from the need of the day of a husband and wife supplementing each other’s income, it noted that living together conferred benefits on both of reduced joint living expenses. The Court held not only was the claimant entitled to compensation for dependency, the insurance company had erred in taking the age of the deceased and ought to have considered the husband’s age in computing compensation.

Tags : DEPENDENCY   COMPENSATION   EARNING SPOUSE   SAVINGS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved