IMPORTANT POINT
Process of assessment of compensation must be certain and not vague.

Headnote:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 168 and 173 – Death in accident – Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation to claimants together with 12% interest – Claimants, being wife, parents and sisters of deceased – Deceased was 23 years of age and was earning about Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- per month by running a flour mill – Process of assessment of compensation in present case had been too uncertain, rather vague and unreasonably restrictive; and amount as awarded to appellants cannot be said to be that of just compensation – Where deceased was self-employed and was 23 years of age, addition of 40% of established income is required to be provided – Even if father of deceased is not taken as dependent, it appears reasonable to take number of his dependents as 4 and to provide for deduction of 1/4th for personal and living expenses – Deceased being 23 years of age and in overall circumstances, multiplier of 18 would be appropriate in present case – Claimants-appellants would be entitled to further an amount of Rs. 1,20,240/- – Accident in question took place in year 1987 – Parents of deceased had expired during pendency of appeal – Enhanced amount of compensation (Rs. 1,20,240/-) shall be apportioned amongst appellants in manner that appellant No. 1, wife of deceased, shall be allowed 50% thereof (i.e., Rs. 60,120/-); and each of appellant Nos. 2 and 3, sisters of deceased, shall be allowed 25% (i.e., Rs. 30,060/- each). (Paras 4, 7, 8, 9 and 9.1)
       Facts of Case:
       Fatal accident. Instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.03.2018, as passed in FA No. 1083 of 1993, whereby High Court of Gujarat has dismissed appeal filed by claimants against award dated 28.09.1992, as made by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and has declined prayer for enhancement of amount of compensation.
       Findings of Court:
       Even while taking estimated income of deceased at Rs. 1,800/- p.m. as assessed by Tribunal and providing for 40% enhancement towards future prospects, expected income of deceased is taken at Rs. 2,520/- p.m and, after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses, loss of income for claimants comes to Rs. 1,890/- p.m. i.e., Rs. 22,680/- per annum; and further, with application of multiplier of 18, final figure towards loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,08,240/- (22,680 x 18). Tribunal, on this score, has awarded sum of Rs. 2,88,000/- only. Claimants-appellants would be entitled to further an amount of Rs. 1,20,240/-.
       Result : Appeal Partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Maheshwari. J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.03.2018, as passed in FA No. 1083 of 1993, whereby the High Court of Gujarat has dismissed the appeal filed by the claimants against the award dated 28.09.1992, as made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Main) Kachchh at Bhuj in MACP No. 52 of 1987 and has declined the prayer for enhancement of the amount of compensation.

3. On 07.01.2019, this Court had issued notice in the petition for Special Leave to Appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 14.03.2018 'only to examine the non-award of future prospects while awarding compensation to the claimants keeping in view of the order passed by the Constitution Bench in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors. - SLP (Civil) No. 25599 of 2014 and batch'. The question in this appeal, therefore, is as to whether reasonable addition towards future prospects has not been provided while assessing the amount of compensation; and if so, what should be provided towards future prospects and what would be the amount of just compensation?

4. The background aspects of the matter, so far relevant for the question at hand, may be noticed, in brief, as follows:

(a) On 03.02.1987 at about 02.45 p.m., the victim Shri Narshibhai Dhanji Sathwara, while proceeding from IFFCO colony of Gandhidham to Ganeshnagar on a moped with his friend, met with an accident on being hit from behind by the offending bus bearing registration No. GTY 8608, owned by the respondent No. 1 and insured by the respondent No. 2. Both the moped riders succumbed to the injuries sustained in this accident.
(b) The claimants, being the wife, parents and sisters of the deceased Shri Narshibhai Dhanji Sathwara, made the claim for compensation in MACP No. 52 of 1987 while asserting that the deceased was 23 years of age and was earning about Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- per month by running a flour mill.
(c) In its award dated 28.09.1992, while holding that the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending bus and that the respondents were liable to make payment of compensation, the Tribunal took up the process of assessment of the amount of compensation. In this regard, the Tribunal found that the flour mill in question belonged to the father of the deceased and no documentary evidence (like income tax returns or books of accounts etc.) as regards income of the deceased was adduced to substantiate the claim as made but, on an overall appreciation of the evidence on record, the Tribunal observed that the deceased was running the flour mill in the capacity of a manager and put an estimate on the gross earning of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. However, the Tribunal provided for the elements of share of the father of deceased as also the expenditure on maintenance etc. and took the income of the deceased at Rs. 1462.50 p.m. and then, while making a few observations regarding inflationary trend of economy and prospective increase in income of the deceased, finally assessed his income at Rs. 1,800/- p.m.. Thereafter, the Tribunal deducted l/3rd on the personal expenses and hence, took the loss of dependency for the claimants at Rs. 1,200/- per month i.e., Rs. 14,400/- per annum. The Tribunal applied the multiplier of 20 and in this manner, ultimately awarded Rs. 2,88,000/- towards pecuniary loss. With addition of Rs. 12,000/- towards conventional heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards compensation to the claimants together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing the claim application.
(d) Against the award so made by the Tribunal, the claimants preferred an appeal before the High Court of Gujarat, seeking enhancement of compensation. It is noticed, as per the submissions made, that the parents of the deceased Shri Narshibhai Dhanji Sathwara expired during the pendency of the said appeal. The High Court, in its impugned

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(SC) 255

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.SMT. SHANTABEN AND OTHERS – APPELLANT(S) VS. NATIONAL POWER TRANSPORT AND ANOTHER – RESPONDENT(S)CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2523 OF 2019 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 994 of 2019)Decided on : 06-03-2019

IMPORTANT POINTProcess of assessment of compensation must be certain and not vague.

Cases Referred (1)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.
SMT. SHANTABEN AND OTHERS – APPELLANT(S)
VS.
NATIONAL POWER TRANSPORT AND ANOTHER – RESPONDENT(S)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2523 OF 2019 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 994 of 2019)
Decided on : 06-03-2019

IMPORTANT POINT
Process of assessment of compensation must be certain and not vague.