Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.V.N. BHATTI, VIJAY BISHNOI, JJ.
Mohinder Kaur (D) Through L.R. – Appellant
Versus
Brij Lal Arora And Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7459 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 580 of 2020)
Decided On : 12-05-2026
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 168 and 173 – Death in motor accident – Compensation of Rs.2,23,000/- awarded by Tribunal, subsequently, enhanced to 13,44,000/- by High Court in appeal – Deceased was a bright third-year engineering student – Objective of awarding compensation in motor accident claims is to ensure “just and reasonable compensation” to victim or aggrieved dependants of deceased – Tribunal assessed monthly income of deceased at Rs.3,000/-, which was increased to Rs.6,000/- by High Court – Although High Court has enhanced compensation, same is still on lower side – Notional income of engineering student cannot be equated to minimum wages paid to an unskilled worker – While there is no cogent evidence on record to substantiate claim that deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- per month by imparting computer training, he was a meritorious student with considerable academic promise and substantial future prospects – It is appropriate to assess monthly income of deceased at Rs.12,000/-, considering that death occurred in year 2000 – Multiplier applicable is ‘18’ – Total compensation of Rs.19,25,070/-, alongwith 7.5% interest awarded. (Paras 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 31, 32 and 33)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal has been preferred by Appellant Claimant challenging order dated 05.09.2018 passed in FAO-2335-2003 (O&M) by High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh wherein High Court partly allowed appeal, and modified Award dated 19.04.2003 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur in MACT Case No. 81 of 07.08.2001/03.06.2002, by enhancing compensation awarded to Appellant-Claimant by Rs.11,21,000/-, thereby granting total compensation of Rs.13,44,000/- as against Rs.2,23,000/- awarded by Tribunal.
Findings of Court:
On issue of rate of interest, while Tribunal awarded interest @ of 9% per annum, High Court reduced the same to 7.5% per annum, which is reasonable and adequately serves ends of justice.
Result : Appeal disposed of.
Key Points: - The Supreme Court re-evaluates notional income for a deceased engineering student, setting it at Rs.12,000 per month (year 2000) and applying 40% future prospects with 50% deduction for personal living expenses, multiplier 18, resulting in Rs.18,14,400 for loss of dependency (!) (!) . - It adds future prospects (40%) to notional income, deducts personal living expenses (50%), and applies the 18-year multiplier to compute annual dependency loss (!) . - It awards enhanced conventional heads: loss of estate Rs.15,000; filial consortium Rs.40,000; funeral expenses Rs.30,000 (!) (!) (!) . - It corrects motorcycle damage to Rs.25,670 (instead of Rs.18,000) based on surveyor’s report (!) (!) . - Total enhanced compensation amounts to Rs.19,25,070, with interest at 7.5% p.a. from filing until realization; respondents liable within eight weeks (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment clarifies that notional income of engineering students cannot be equated with minimum wages of unskilled workers and cites Navjot Singh and Arvind Kumar Mishra for guidance on future earnings and notional income (!) (!) . - High Court’s denial of future prospects and reduction of interest were reversed; 7.5% interest deemed reasonable for delayed proceedings (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT :
VIJAY BISHNOI, J.
Leave Granted.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant-Claimant challenging the order dated 05.09.2018 (hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”) passed in FAO-2335-2003 (O&M) by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”) wherein the High Court partly allowed the appeal, and modified the Award dated 19.04.2003 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in MACT Case No. 81 of 07.08.2001/03.06.2002 (hereinafter referred to as “Award”), by enhancing the compensation awarded to the Appellant-Claimant by Rs.11,21,000/-, thereby granting the total compensation of Rs.13,44,000/- as against Rs.2,23,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. On 28.05.2000, Karan Pal Singh (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”), an Engineering student aged 22 years at the time of the incident, was going on his motorcycle No. PB-21-8715 Kawasaki Bajaj towards his college, alongwith Parveen Sharma, his classmate (hereinafter referred as “pillion rider”) on Delhi-Mathura road, and when they reached at the turning of Ajahi at about 10.30 AM and were waiting in the gap of the road towards the college, the offending truck No. HR-38-E-1625 being driven by Respondent No. 2 in a rash and negligent manner, came from the Delhi side at a fast speed, and hit the motorcyclists, causing severe injuries, while also damaging the motorcycle. The injured were taken to Maheshwari Hospital for treatment and the deceased was referred to Agra for further treatment, where he succumbed to his injuries. The owner of the offending truck is Respondent No. 1 and the truck was insured with Respondent No. 3.
4. The Appellant-Claimant herein, being the mother of the deceased, filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming a compensation of Rs.7,00,000/-.
5. At this juncture, it is pertinent to note that this Court shall confine itself solely to the issue of enhancement of compensation and will not delve into the question concerning the cause of the accident, inasmuch as both the Tribunal and the High Court have concurrently held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by Respondent No.2, and no dispute survives as regards this finding, and the said findings have not been challenged by the Respondents before this Court.
AWARD PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL
6. The Appellant-Claimant pleaded that the deceased was a bright third-year student pursuing B.E. Mechanical Engineering from G.L.A. Institute of Technology and Management, Mathura. It was further submitted that the deceased had obtained a diploma certificate in Plastic Mould Technology issued by the Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology, Chennai (Ex.A.13), and was granted a one-year exemption in the four-year degree course of Engineering by G.L.A. Institute of Technology and Management. The testimony of AW-6 Gaurav Vasudev, who had also completed the said diploma course, was relied upon to that effect. The Appellant-Claimant also relied upon a certificate from Web World, Majitha Road, Amritsar showing that the deceased had passed the prescribed course of Auto CAD. The Appellant-Claimant further contended that the deceased was earning Rs.4000/- per month by imparting computer training to certain residents of Mathura. On the strength of the said certificates and assertions, the Appellant-Claimant argued that her son was capable of earning Rs.15,000/- per month after completing his engineering degree.
7. However, the Tribunal observed that it was extremely difficult to accept such an assertion regarding the income of a boy who was still an Engineering student in the absence of proper record or examination of the persons who were being provided computer training. Considering that the scope of the engineering course in the market had not been established by authentic evidence, and in light of the deceased’s age (22 years
(1) Death in motor accident – Objective of awarding compensation is to ensure “just and reasonable compensation” to victim or dependants of deceased.(2) Notional income of engineering student cannot ....
In the absence of proof of income, notional income should be Rs. 36,000 per annum, with deductions for dependents standardized based on family size.
Post deletion of the Second Schedule, compensation for child victims of accidents must be based on Minimum Wages and include future prospects and proper deductions for personal expenses.
(1) Strict rules of evidence as applicable in a criminal trial, are not applicable in motor accident compensation cases.(2) Death in motor accident – Salary certificate and pay slip are conclusive pr....
Courts must assess compensation for accident victims based on realistic evaluation of their potential earnings and educational background, rather than just minimum wage standards.
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
