SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka, JJ.
Sh. Fakir Chand Taneja & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The Oriental Insurance Co. Limited & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 6550 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(C) No. 7958 of 2018)
Decided On : 06-09-2022
COMPENSATION - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - The Court refers to Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which allows for the filing of claims for compensation in case of motor accidents.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for the death of the deceased in a motor accident. The Tribunal granted compensation, which was challenged before the High Court and dismissed. The main issue is the calculation of the multiplicand for compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The Tribunal deducted several components of income for calculating the multiplicand, which the appellants argue is not permissible. The Court refers to the decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors, 2017(16) SCC 680, which allows only the deduction of income tax. The Court finds that the deductions made by the Tribunal are not justified, except for the deduction of driver assistance. The Court calculates the multiplicand based on the actual income less tax paid and adds future prospects of increase in earnings. The Court also deducts a sum for personal expenditure and applies the appropriate multiplier. The Court adds conventional amounts for loss of estate, loss of consortium, and funeral expenses.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court holds that for calculating the multiplicand for compensation, only income tax can be deducted. Other deductions such as allowances are not permissible. The Court applies the appropriate multiplier and adds conventional amounts for specific losses.
Result: The appeal is partly allowed. The first respondent is directed to deposit the differential amount with the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders regarding disbursement and/or investment of the amount.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent. This appeal arises out of a claim for compensation filed by the appellants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Delhi (the Tribunal) under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The claim was made on account of the death of one Sunil Taneja (the deceased). The first two appellants are the parents of the deceased. The third appellant is the widow of the deceased and the fourth and fifth appellants are the children of the deceased.
3. On 3rd February 2007, the deceased was travelling by a Tata Qualis vehicle from Khargone in Madhya Pradesh to Shirdi in Maharashtra. A truck insured with the first respondent gave a dash to the vehicle by which the deceased was travelling. As a result of the impact of the accident, the deceased died on the spot. The deceased was working as an Assistant Vice President (Exports) in a private company. The Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.1,01,50,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 7.5% per annum. The award of the Tribunal was challenged before the High Court by the appellants as well as the first respondent. Both the appeals were dismissed.
4. The main submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that for calculating the multiplicand, the Tribunal deducted several components of income such as House Rent Allowance, Conveyance Allowance, Leave Travel Allowance etc. which is not permissible in view of the decision of the Constitution Bench in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors, 2017(16) SCC 680. He urged that except for the deduction on account of income tax, no other deduction was permissible. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent supported the view taken by the Tribunal and the High Court.
5. The Annexure P/1 shows that the monthly salary of the deceased was Rs.1,13,065/-. This amount is without deduction of income tax. As held in the case of Pranay Sethi1, the income required to be taken into consideration for computing multiplicand is the actual income less tax paid. However, the Tribunal has taken into consideration only the basic salary of Rs.44,625/- per month and has ignored all the allowances such as Conveyance Allowance, House Rent Allowance etc. The deductions made by Tribunal are not at all justified except the deduction of driver assistance of Rs.6,600/-. Though the amount of income tax paid by the deceased is not on record, a reasonable amount will have to be deducted on the said account. After making allowance for income tax and after deducting the amount payable on account of driver assistance, the monthly income of the deceased will be Rs.95,000/-.
6. In terms of the decision of this Court in the case of Pranay Sethi1, 50% of Rs.95,000/- will have to be added towards future prospects of increase in earnings. Therefore, the income will have to be taken at Rs.1,42,500/-. As there are five dependents, in terms of the decision of this Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., 2009 (6) SCC 121, one fourth of the amount will have to be deducted on account of personal expenditure. Thus, the multiplicand will have to be taken as Rs.1,05,875/- after deducting a sum of Rs.36,625/-. Considering the fact that age of the deceased was 36 years, multiplier of 15 has been rightly applied by the Tribunal in the light of the decision in the case of Sarla Verma2. By applying multiplier of 15, the compensation payable will be (Rs.1,05,875x12x15) Rs.1,90,57,500/-. The conventional amounts of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of the estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses will have to be added. Thus, the total compensation amount payable to the appellants will be Rs.1,91,27,500/-. Interest will be payable on the said amount, as directed by the Tribunal.
7. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed with no order as to co
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors
Sarla Verma (Smt) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.
Only income tax can be deducted for calculating the multiplicand for compensation.
The calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is based on the deceased's actual income, future prospects, and multiplier as per relevant case laws.
Accident claim - Accident occurred in the year 2012 and appeal is of the year 2018, therefore, interest, which is granted 7% will have to be 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till th....
Accident claim - Order of investment is not passed because applicants /claimants are neither illiterate or rustic villagers.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper calculation of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including the consideration of future prospects, personal....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, considering the deceased's income, future prospects, and other conventional he....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of just and reasonable compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, considering the deceased's income, future prospects, loss....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.