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

2009 Supreme(Pat) 761

2012 (1) PLJR 580
PATNA HIGH COURT
Mihir Kr. Jha, J.
Saiyada Shahida Bono W/o Sayed Imtayaz Ali Rizwi & Anr. ...Appellants
vs.
Sri Ramdhari Pd. Gupta S/o Sri Mahabir Pd. Gupta & Ors. ...Respondents
MA No. 115 of 2006
Decided on: 12.5.2009

The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to consider the future prospective earning capacity of a qualified individual, taking into account the totality of circumstances and the individual's prospective career, in assessing loss to the dependent family members.

Headnote:

Compensation - Future Prospective Earning Capacity - Motor Vehicle Act - [Motor Vehicle Act, Section 166] - The court discussed the issue of future prospective earning capacity of the deceased and the assessment of loss for the dependent family members. It highlighted the need to consider the totality of circumstances, including the prospective career of the deceased, in determining the earning capacity. The court also emphasized the categorization of individuals based on their qualifications and the need to assess the future income accordingly. The judgment referenced and relied on various cases to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The court considered the issue of future prospective earning capacity of the deceased, who was a qualified MBA graduate and had a job offer at the time of his death in a road accident. The claimants had initially confined their claim to a fixed income, leading to a dispute over the assessment of future income.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the tribunal had not considered the special features of the case and had applied a theory of notional income due to the lack of evidence on the future prospective income of the deceased. It held that the future earning capacity of a qualified individual should be taken into account for assessing loss to the dependent family members.

Issues: The main issue was the assessment of future prospective earning capacity of the deceased and the application of a fixed income theory by the tribunal due to lack of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to consider the totality of circumstances, including the prospective career of the deceased, in determining the earning capacity. It also highlighted the categorization of individuals based on their qualifications and the need to assess the future income accordingly.

Final Decision: The court modified the amount of award by directing the Insurance Company to pay an additional sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with interest, based on the assessment of the deceased's future prospective earning capacity.

Order

Heard counsel for the appellants, counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company as also counsel for the respondent-Owner of the Vehicle.

2. What would be the income or further prospective income of a qualified person to be taken into account for payment of compensation in case of death in an accident by motor vehicle has to primarily be decided in the light of the evidence on record, but then there can be also no rule of thumb that the moment such income is not proved in words and figures by the claimants, the tribunal must resort to fixed standard notional income.

3. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is no consideration by the tribunal on the special features of the present case where admittedly" life of the deceased, a young man of 24 years, having completed the degree in master of business administration was cut short on account of an unfortunate road accident. He would, therefore, submit that the tribunal had to consider the issue of future prospective earning capacity of the deceased especially when evidences were brought on the record to show that soon after completion of his M.B.A. course he had also been given first job offer from a private institution. Counsel for the appellant in this context had also placed reliance on few judgments to contend that normally the Courts have assessed even the income of a student undergoing specialized course on higher footing than an average literate person. In this context learned counsel has placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Tamarajdhwaj Dahayat & Anr. Vs. Ramvaran Patel & Ors. reported in 2008 ACJ 2782 where income of a student of first year of BCA (Bachelor of Computer Applications) was assessed at Rs. 4,000/- per month. He has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in the case of 'H.S. Chetan vs. Chandra Mouli & Anr. reported in 2008 ACJ 191 where the deceased on the verge of completion of his law degree with a plan to pursue legal profession was assessed of his earning capacity @ Rs. 7,000/- per month. Yet again he has placed reliance on the judgment of Single Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of 'Ratna Chaudhuri vs. State of Haryana & Ors.' reported in 2006 ACJ 2700 where prospective income of a third year MBA student was assessed at Rs. 8,000/- per month.

4. Mr. Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company on the other hand would submit that here in this case the issue of future earning capacity of the deceased was not raised because the claimants themselves had confined their claim by taking a plea of his fixed income @ Rs. 3,000/- per month. The Counsel thus submits that the whole case had proceeded on the basis of the income of the deceased of Rs. 3,000/- per month and therefore, in absence of any evidence on this score as to what would be future prospective income or the earning capacity of the deceased, the tribunal had not committed any error in applying theory of notional income. He would, further submit that as a matter of fact even if the tribunal had applied multiplier of 18, the Insurance Company having taken into account the totality of the circumstances did not choose to assail that part of the erroneous finding even though mother of the deceased, the claimant being in the age group of 50 to 55, was entitled to the multiplier of 8. In this context he would refer to a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of 'Ramesh Singh & Anr. Vs. Satbir Singh & Anr.' reported in AIR 2008 S.C. 1233.

5. There is no doubt that while fixing the income of a student or a person who is yet to mature into his full earning capacity after completing his education, the Court Tribunal have to examine totality of the circumstances including prospective career of future of the deceased. A boy who is student of MBA course had unfortunately met an accident, cannot be however held to be circumscribed or limited by the concep






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