Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : M.JAGANADHA RAO
A.P.State Road Trans.Corpn. - Appellant
Versus
G.Ramanaiah - Respondent
Decided On : 09-23-87
COMPENSATION - FATAL ACCIDENT - MULTIPLIERS - PRINCIPLES - CALCULATION - INJURY CASES - MULTIPLIERS - CALCULATION - PRINCIPLES - CALCULATION - EXAMPLES - FULL BENCH DECISION - NARSAVVA'S CASE - INTERPRETATION.
Fact of the Case:
A 10-year-old boy died in an accident caused by the negligence of the appellant-corporation's driver. The respondent, the boy's father, claimed Rs. 35,000/- as compensation. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,000/-. The Corporation appealed, arguing that the award was excessive and that the father was not a dependent of the son at the time of the son's death.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the principles of law applicable for computing the damages in favor of the parents of deceased children are: (a) In the case of death of children, the parents can claim the present value of the future contributions which the deceased would have made to them. (b) The multiplier that has to be applied is not the one appropriate to the age of the child at its death but to the age of the parents. (c) If the child is unmarried at the time of accident but likely to be married in course of time, the court cannot proceed on the basis that the contribution to the parents will be altogether stopped after such marriage. (d) In the case of children above 5 years and below 10 years, it will not be possible to ascertain a suitable multiplier because of the fairly higher mortality rates in that period. But, it is permissible to arrive at conventional amounts, which may range upto Rs. 15,000/- for accidents in the late seventies. (e) In the case of children below 5 years (there are no decided cases of award of damages to the parents, but) a nominal amount upto rs. 5,000/- may perhaps be granted. The court also held that there cannot be separate multiplier tables for fatal accident cases and for injury cases, and that the Full Bench decision in Narsavva's case did not prohibit the use of Acturial Multiplier Tables.
Issues: 1. What are the principles of law applicable for computing the damages in favour of the parents of deceased children and should a Multiplier relevant to the age of the child be selected or relevant to the age of the parents be selected ? 2. Should there be or can there be separate multiplier tables for fatal Accident cases and for Injury cases ? 3. Whether the dependency would have ceased on the date by which the child, if alive, would have reached the age of marriage ? 4. Whether the Full Bench in Narsavva s case rejected use of multipliers Tables ?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. In the case of death of children, the parents can claim the present value of the future contributions which the deceased would have made to them. The dependency can be estimated by computing the annual contribution which the child would have made from the date of his probable earning. The question as to when a child would have reached such an earning capacity and as to what he could have contributed would depend on the facts of each case, the relevant factors being the child's general level of intelligence or health, the family background, the father's or family profession, if any, the capacity of the parents to educate the child etc. 2. After arriving at the annual contribution (or annual dependency) to the family, the multiplier that has to be applied is not the one appropriate to the age of the child at its death but to the age of the parents. This is because of the fact that the dependency to the parents will last only for the life-time of the parents, who are likely to predecease the child (if the latter had not died in the accident ). Of course, if the child is a grown-up person and married, the multiplier to be applied for arriving at the present value of the future loss to the wife, is the one appropriate to the age of the deceased because, the wife, being younger is normally likely to live upto or beyond the life of her husband. 3. If the child is unmarried at the time of accident but likely to be married in course of time, the court cannot proceed on the basis that the contribuiion to the parents will be altogether stopped after such marriage. It may only be partially reduced. This is because of the statutory obligation in our country upon children to maintain their aged parents. In such cases, it is permissible to assess the contribution upto the possible date of marriage and later, separately. 4. In the case of children above 5 years and below 10 years, it will not be possible to ascertain a suitable multiplier because of the fairly higher mortality rates in that period. But, it is permissible to arrive at conventional amounts, which may range upto Rs. 15,000/- for accidents in the late seventies. 5. In the case of children below 5 years (there are no decided cases of award of damages to the parents, but) a nominal amount upto rs. 5,000/- may perhaps be granted.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
( 1 ) FOUR points arise for consideration. (1) What are the principles of law applicable for computing the damages in favour of the parents of deceased children and should a Multiplier relevant to the age of the child be selected or relevant to the age of the parents be selected ? (2) Should there be or can there be separate multiplier tables for fatal Accident cases and for Injury cases ? (Examples worked out) (3) Whether the dependency would have ceased on the date by which the child, if alive, would have reached the age of marriage ? (4) Whether the Full Bench in Narsavva s case rejected use of multipliers Tables ?
( 2 ) PARENTS, claims can be divided into five broad categories, as arisingout of the death of (a) Married children, (b) Unmarried adult children above 18 years; (c) Grown-up children over 10 years and below 18 years; (d) Children between 5 to 10 years; and (e) Children below 5 years. I shall consider the English as well as Indian cases and the relevant mathematical principles.
( 3 ) THE respondent s son aged 10 years who was in the 2nd class at school, died in the accident that occurred on24-7-1978 at Guttupalli village on the Cuddapah-Chittoor road at 4. 30 p. m. The respondent who is the father of the deceased claimed Rs. 35,000/- as compensation. After holding that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of the appellant-Corporation s driver, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,000/ -. The Corporation has preferred this appeal. Though some argument was advanced on the question of negligence of the driver, there is abundant evidence in support of the finding and there are no grounds for interfering with the finding regarding negligence.
( 4 ) COMING to the question of compensation, it is argued by the appellant s counsel that the award is excessive. It is argued that the father was not a dependent of the son at the time of the son s death. The boy had failed in the first class and was detained for one year and then promoted to the 2nd class. It is argued that Multiplier Tables should not be applied and even if applied, should be evolved separately for fatal accident cases and for injury cases.
( 5 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent, Sri M. N. Narasimhna Reddi, has contended that, in fact, the award is on the low side. It is argued that the boy was joined in the 1st class in the middle of the year and that therefore his failure in the first class should not be given much importance. The father of the child is an agriculturist and could have given good education to his children and, even otherwise, would have helped his father in the agriculture. Point Nos. 1 and 3 :
( 6 ) THE question of estimation of damages consequent on the death of young children is difficult and it will be necessary and useful to take note of certain general principles laid down both in English cases as well as Indian. There is quite a good amount of difference in the method of estimation of damages upon the death of Married children; Unmarried adult children; adolescent children; Infant children as detailed in Mc Gregor on Damages, 13th Ed. (para 1233 to 1236) and Kemp and Kemp (The Quantum of Damages, 1982) in Chapter 30 (claims for death of Adult child) and in Chapter 31 (Claims for death of Infant child) and Munkman on Damages (Pages 50, 66, 67, 128, 129) and these aspects are considered below.
( 7 ) I shall point out that in the case of death of children, the parents age is relevant for selecting the Multiplier and not the age of the child and that, having regard to Indian conditions, the dependency cannot altogether cease as from the date on which the child might have got married,though the dependency may get reduced.
( 8 ) (A) Married children :when a deceased son is already well established in life, himself with his wife and probably children, it will be found that the parents would have been receiving something from the son towards the dependency voluntarily or by some self-imposed
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
