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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
R.G.Avachat, J.
Kavilethu Neelakantan Rajan – Appellant
Versus
Udailal Ramnarayani Ahir – Respondent
First Appeal No. 2748 of 2009
Decided On : 28-01-2022

Advocates Appeared:
A.C.Darandale, Advocate, A.N.Ansari, Advocate, R.H.Dahat, Advocate, S.S.Patil, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles for assessing compensation in cases of death of a student, as laid down by the Apex Court, to determine the adequacy of compensation in a motor accident claim.

Headnote:

Compensation - Motor Accident Claims - Apex Court Principles - [DEATH IN VEHICULAR ACCIDENT] - [Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166] - The court discussed the principles regarding grant of compensation in case of death of a student as laid down by the Apex Court in various judgments, including the focus on career prospects and likely earnings, consideration of future earning based on chosen field of employment or profession, relevance of part-time earnings or job offers, and impact of injuries on functional disability. The court applied these principles to determine the compensation for the deceased student who had received a conditional job offer before his death.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased was a last year M.B.A. student who died in a vehicular accident. He had been offered a job with an annual pay package, but the offer was conditional and contingent upon various factors. The appellants, feeling the compensation to have been inadequate, appealed for enhancement.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the deceased's future earning potential and the conditional nature of the job offer needed to be considered in determining the compensation. It applied the principles laid down by the Apex Court to calculate the compensation, ultimately enhancing it to Rs.23,78,000.00.

Issues: The main issue was the adequacy of the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in the case of the deceased student's death in a vehicular accident.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles established by the Apex Court regarding the assessment of compensation in cases of death of a student, considering the deceased's future earning potential, conditional job offer, and impact of injuries on functional disability.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and enhanced the compensation to Rs.23,78,000.00, to be paid along with interest. The amount already paid by the respondent Insurance Company was to be given due set off.

JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal for enhancement of compensation granted by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Ahmednagar on account of death in vehicular accident. The Motor Accident Claim Petition (MACP) was preferred by the appellants - parents of the deceased Rakesh. The Tribunal granted a lumpsum compensation of Rs.6,00,000.00 along with interest @ 6% p.a. The appellants - claimants, feeling the compensation to have been grossly inadequate, have preferred the present appeal.

2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :-

3. The deceased Rakesh was the only child of the appellants herein. He was Last Year student of M.B.A. He was to appear for the last semester of the M.B.A. He had cleared all the examinations with very good performance. In a Campus interview, the Reliance Securities India Ltd. had offered him a job with annual pay package of Rs.3,00,000.00. Deceased Rakesh was 22 years of age. He died in an accident involving motorbike and the truck.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that, the deceased Rakesh had very bright future. He was the only child of the appellants. He had been offered a pay package of Rs.3,00,000.00 p.a. by a renowned industry. The Tribunal ought to have granted compensation applying the requisite formula given in various judgments of the Apex Court. According to learned counsel, the Apex Court, in case of Krishna Moorthy (2020) 15 SCC 493, has given certain principles regarding grant of compensation in case of death of a student. The learned counsel has also relied on the following two authorities, to ultimately submit that, the Tribunal ought to have granted just and adequate compensation :

(1) (2020) 15 SCC 493 [ M.R. Krishna Murthi Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and others ]

(2) (2015) 2 SCC 180 [ Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi Vs. Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma and anr. ]

(3) (2020) 9 SCC 644 [ New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Somwati and ors. etc. etc. ]

5. Learned counsel for the appellants, therefore, urged for allowing the appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company would, on the other hand, submit that, the deceased was a student. The alleged offer of job was post the deceased breathed his last. The offer was conditional and as such, was contingent upon various factors. The deceased died bachelor. His father, one of the appellants, is an Exserviceman. The mother of the deceased could be said to be dependent on her husband alone. According to learned counsel, the Tribunal, in the facts and circumstances of the case, has granted adequate compensation. There is no warrant for interference with the impugned award. The learned counsel has relied on the Apex Court judgment in case of Malliga Vs. Thiruvalluvar Transport Corporation [ (2000) 10 SCC 532 ].

7. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused the citations relied on. Also gone through the evidence in the matter. In case of Krishna Murthi, the Apex Court has observed as under : The following principles can be culled out from the decided cases on this issue :

(i) In those cases where the victim of the accident is not an earning person but a student, while assessing the compensation for loss of future earning, the focus of the examination would be the career prospect and the likely earning of such a person in future. For example, where the claimant is pursuing a particular professional course, the poser would be : what would have been his income had he joined a service commensurating with the said course. That can be the future earning.

(ii) There may be cases where the victim is not, at that stage, doing any such course to get a particular job. He or she may be studying in a school. In such a case, future career would depend upon multiple factors like the family background, choice/ interest of the complainant to pursue a particular career, facilities available to him/ her for adopting such a career, the favourable surrounding circumstances to see which would have enabled the cla

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top