Back
SANJAY KAROL, UJJAL BHUYAN
Saroj – Appellant
Versus
Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. – Respondent
ORDER
SANJAY KAROL J.,
Leave Granted.
2. These appeals are at the instance of the wife and sons1[ Hereinafter “claimant-appellants”] of the deceased Silak Ram, who was on 4th August, 2015, travelling on a motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-12X-2820, along with one Rohit. Both were found lying injured on the side of the road. The former had succumbed to his injuries and the latter was taken for treatment to Medical College, Rohtak.
3. One Krishan who had discovered the deceased and the injured person on the road, reported the matter to the police and, during the investigation of such incident, the statement of the injured Rohit revealed the particulars of the offending vehicles. In connection thereto, F.I.R.No.481/2015 dated 4th August, 2015 under Sections 279/337, 304A was registered at Police Station, Sampla.
4. The claim petition, bearing No.25 of 2015 was instituted by the family members of the deceased on 16th December, 2015 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak2[Hereinafter “MACT”]. Vide Award dated 26th April, 2017 an amount of Rs.19,35,400/- was passed with an interest @7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition. The respondent-insurance company was directe
(1) Death in motor accident – As to age of deceased, School Leaving Certificate has been accorded statutory recognition – Age mentioned in Aadhar Card could not be taken as a conclusive proof in view....
The court affirmed the deduction of 50% for living expenses for a bachelor in compensation cases, prioritizing postmortem findings over Aadhaar as proof for age verification.
Appellate courts can enhance compensation in motor accident claims even without a cross-appeal, where just compensation principles apply, considering established evidence of income and deductions.
Point of law: “Whether the multiplier should depend on the age of the dependents or that of the deceased has been hanging fire for sometime
The court ruled that statutory documents like ITR should be prioritized in income assessment for compensation calculations, including allowances and applying the correct age multiplier.
The court established that accurate income assessment, consideration of future prospects, and appropriate multipliers are essential for determining just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The court applied legal principles from previous judgments to uphold the assessment of the deceased's income and modify the multiplier for calculating the loss of dependency.
The Aadhaar card cannot be considered as proof of domicile, and the burden of proof lies with the claimant to establish residence and work location for determining compensation.
The court affirmed that notional income for compensation should reflect wages in the country of employment, not local rates, and clarified that mere overtaking does not imply negligence.
Multiplier has to be determined o the basis of age of the deceased and not his mother.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
