Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 1789

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surya Kant, J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.
Vidhyadevi Ahirwar & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Dharmendra Rajak & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 6305 of 2022 (@ Petition For Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 6337 of 2021)
Decided On : 07-09-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Shishir Kumar Saxena, Advocate, Mr. R.N. Pareek, Advocate, Ms. Payal Swarup, Advocate, Mr. Praveen Swarup, Advocate, for the Appellant; Dr. Meera Agarwal, Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Chandra Mishra, Advocate, for the Respondent.

The claimants were entitled to the full amount of compensation as assessed by the High Court, and the error in restricting the enhancement was rectified by the Supreme Court.

Headnote:
Motor Vehicle Accident - Compensation - 'National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & ORS.' (2017) 16 SCC 680 - The court awarded enhanced compensation to the claimants based on the principles laid down in the referred case. The appellants were held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.5,61,600, out of which Rs.5,00,000 had already been awarded by the High Court. The appellants were directed to affix the court fee on the balance amount of Rs.61,600, and on doing so, the said amount shall also be released to them along with interest accrued thereon.
Fact of the Case:

The appellants filed for enhancement of compensation arising from a motor vehicle accident in which they lost their bread earner. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.6,48,000. The High Court, following the principles laid down in 'National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & ORS.' (2017) 16 SCC 680, held that the claimants were entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000 in addition to what was awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:

The High Court restricted the enhancement to Rs.5,00,000 based on the premise that the appellants had valued their appeal at Rs.5,00,000 only. The Supreme Court found that the High Court was not justified in not awarding the full amount of compensation as assessed by it and allowed the appeal, holding the appellants entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.5,61,600.
Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of the claimants to enhanced compensation and the restriction imposed by the High Court based on the valuation of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the claimants were entitled to the full amount of compensation as assessed by the High Court and rectified the error in restricting the enhancement. The appellants were directed to affix the court fee on the balance amount of Rs.61,600, and on doing so, the said amount shall also be released to them along with interest accrued thereon.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the appellants were held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.5,61,600, out of which Rs.5,00,000 had already been awarded by the High Court. The appellants were directed to affix the court fee on the balance amount of Rs.61,600, and on doing so, the said amount shall also be released to them along with interest accrued thereon.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants - claimants filed Miscellaneous Appeal No.5823/2018 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior for enhancement of compensation arising out of the motor vehicle accident in which they lost their bread earner.

3. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Datia, M.P. awarded compensation of Rs.6,48,000/-. The High Court following the principles laid down by this Court in 'National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & ORS.' (2017) 16 SCC 680, held as follows:-

' xx xx xx

Admittedly, deceased was of the age of 21 years, therefore, multiplier of 18 will be applicable, then total compensation comes out to Rs.12,09,600/- against which only a sum of Rs.6,48,000/- has been awarded therefore, there will be enhancement of Rs.5,61,600/- but the appellants have valued this appeal at Rs.5,00,000/- only and has accordingly paid the court fees, therefore, enhancement is to be restricted to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. Therefore, it is directed that claimants shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal on the basis of the above analysis.

Accordingly, award is suitably modified. Other terms and conditions of the award shall remain the same.'

4. It may thus be seen that despite holding the appellants entitled to enhanced amount of Rs.5,61,000/-, the High Court restricted the enhancement to Rs.5,00,000/- on the premise that the appellants had valued their appeal at Rs.5,00,000/- only.

5. In our considered view, the High Court was not justified in not awarding full amount of compensation as assessed by it.

6. The appellants ought to have been given an opportunity to make good the deficiency in court fee for additional amount of Rs.61,600/- and on deposit thereof, the entire compensation deserved to be released.

7. We are inclined to rectify the above noticed error.

8. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed and the appellants are held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.5,61,600/-, out of which Rs.5,00,000/- has already been awarded by the High Court to them. The appellants shall affix the court fee on the balance amount of Rs.61,600/- and on doing so, the said amount shall also be released to them along with interest accrued thereon.

9. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from today.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document