SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 671

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, JJ.
Nidhi Bhargava & Ors. – Appellant
A1 - Nidhi Bhargava
A2 - Manuj Bhargava
A3 - Anuj Bhargava – Appellant
Versus
National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. - respondents1
1[As per the amended Memo of Parties.]
Rl - National Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Regional Manager
R2 - K. L. Bhargava
R3 - Anil Kumar Kukreja
Civil Appeal No. 5398 of 2025 [@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.10664 of 2019]
Decided on : 22-04-2025

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR Mr. Parminder Singh Goindi, Adv. Ms. Sandhya, Adv. Mr. Deepanshu Jain, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Abhishek Gola, Adv. Mr. Viresh B. Saharya, AOR

IMPORTANT POINT
Death in motor accident – Income Tax Return is a legally admissible document on which income assessment of deceased could be made.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 168 and 173 – Death in motor accident – Quantum of compensation reduced by High Court reduced from Rs.31,41,000/- to Rs.16,97,370/-, while maintaining 9% interest rate – Income Tax Return is a legally admissible document on which income assessment of deceased could be made – Determination of income must proceed on the basis of Income Tax Return(s), when available, being a statutory document – When faced with Returns for different Assessment Years, it would be up to Tribunal concerned to adopt either average income therefrom or choose an Assessment Year to rely upon – High Court in present case has dealt with the matter in such a casual and superficial way where rightful claim of appellants under a welfare legislation has been drastically reduced without any cogent reason on a very tenuous ground which is totally unjustified – Original amount [Rs. 31,41,000/-] awarded by Tribunal as compensation restored. (Paras 13, 15 and 16)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal arises from the Final Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2018 rendered by a Single Judge of High Court of Delhi filed by Respondent No.1-Insurance Company, whereby High Court disposed of appeal by reducing compensation payable to Appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- to Rs.16,97,370/-, maintaining interest awarded at the rate of 9% per annum.

Findings of Court:

Payment be made to the Appellants by Respondent No.1 at the rate of 9% interest per annum after adjusting amount(s), if any, that may have been paid during the interregnum. The exercise be completed within two months from today, failing which an additional 9% interest per annum shall be payable for the period of delay, both on the principal amount as well as on the interest component, till the date of actual payment. No order as to costs, in the circumstances.

Result : Civil Appeal disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the Final Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) [2018:DHC:6122 | 2018 SCC OnLine Del 11494] in MAC. APP. No.589 of 2018 rendered by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘High Court’) filed by Respondent No.1-Insurance Company, whereby the High Court disposed of the appeal by reducing the compensation payable to the Appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-One Thousand) to Rs.16,97,370/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy) maintaining the interest awarded at the rate of 9% per annum.

FACTS IN BRIEF:

3. On 12.08.2008, a Blue Line bus bearing Registration No.DL-1PB-0035, being driven by one Javed Aftar in an allegedly negligent manner, hit a motorcycle bearing Registration No.DL-6SX-6483, which was being driven by Kapil Bhargava (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) along with his wife (Appellant No.1), as a result of which the deceased died in hospital and Appellant No.1 survived, but suffered grievous injuries.

4. The Appellants and other legal heirs of the deceased filed a Claim Petition viz. MACT No.357515/2016 under Section 166 read with Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) before the Court of the learned Judge, MACT-1 (Central), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’), claiming compensation for the death of the deceased for Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs). After hearing the parties, on 20.03.2018, the Tribunal by a common judgment awarded a compensation of Rs.31,41,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-One Thousand) with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition, i.e., 27.09.2008 till realization in MACT No.357515/2016.

5. The Appellants, being aggrieved by the Award/Order dated 20.03.2018 in MACT No.357515/2016 preferred an appeal, namely, MAC. APP. No.796/2018 before the High Court for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Respondent No.1, also aggrieved by the Award/Order dated 20.03.2018, preferred MAC. APP. Nos.589/2018 and 592/2018 before the High Court against, apropos MACT No.357515/2016 and MACT No.357259/2016, respectively.

6. The High Court disposed all the three MAC. APP. petitions by the common Impugned Order and held that the Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Year 2008-2009 were filed after the date of the accident, therefore, the income of the deceased had to be assessed on the basis of Assessment Year 2007-2008. While changing some of the heads of compensation granted by the Tribunal, the High Court reduced the compensation payable to the Appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-One Thousand) to Rs. 16,97,370/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy). The High Court also modified the compensation under various heads from Rs.4,30,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Thousand) to Rs.3,94,543/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety- Four Thousand Five Hundred Forty-Three) insofar as MACT No.357259/2016 was concerned.

7. The Appellants have filed the instant appeal challenging the Order of High Court only qua MAC. APP. No.589/2018.

8. It would be useful to set out the computation as per the Tribunal’s Award and the Impugned Order:

Sl. No.

Name of Head

High Court (In Rs.)

MACT (In Rs.)

1.

Loss of Income

16,27,370/-

30,70,690/-

2.

Loss of Estate

15,000/-

15,000/-

3.

Loss of Consortium

40,000/-

40,000/-

4.

Funeral Expenses

15,000/-

15,000/-

Total

16,97,370/-

31,40,690/- [Rounded off to 31,41,000/-]

APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS:

9. The learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the High Court had erred in ignoring the gross income shown by the deceased- Assessee for the Assessment Ye

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top