2026 Supreme(Raj) 713

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
Smt. Roshni Vaishnav Wife Of Shri Pranay Harivyas – Appellant 
Versus 
Kailash Sain, S/o Gopal Lal Sain - Respondent
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 37 of 2022
Decided On : 06-01-2026

For deceased persons in the 40-50 age group, the addition for future prospects must be 30% if the corresponding multiplier for that age group is applied; it cannot be reduced to 15% based on the exact age if the age group remains 40-50.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act - Quantum of compensation - Deduction for personal and living expenses - Where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses should be one-third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceeds six. (Para 14)

(B) Motor Vehicles Act - Calculation of Future Prospects - Age group 40 to 50 years - If the multiplier of 13 is applied based on the age group of 40 to 50 years, the addition towards future prospects must be 30% and cannot be reduced to 15% merely because the deceased was slightly over 50 years on the date of the accident. The age group must be considered consistently for both the multiplier and the grant of future prospects. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
An appeal was filed challenging the reduction of compensation awarded for the loss of dependency. While the Tribunal had applied a multiplier of 13 for a deceased person in the age group of 40 to 50 years, the High Court had reduced the compensation by granting future prospects at 15% instead of 30%, on the ground that the deceased was aged 50 years 3 months on the date of the accident, despite maintaining the multiplier of 13.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the High Court committed an error in granting only 15% towards future prospects. Since the age group was considered to be 40 to 50 years for the application of the multiplier, there was no justification for reducing the future prospects to 15% instead of the prescribed 30% for that specific age group.

Issues: Whether the compensation could be reduced by granting 15% future prospects when the age group of the deceased was maintained as 40 to 50 years for the purpose of applying the multiplier.

Ratio Decidendi: For the application of future prospects, the age group is the primary consideration. If the age group of the deceased is regarded as 40 to 50 years (justifying a multiplier of 13), the addition for future prospects must be 30% as per established legal precedents.

Result: The reduction of compensation by granting 15% future prospects was held to be an error.

ORDER :

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.

"14. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardized deduction. Having considered several subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be onethird (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceed six."

"9. The Tribunal, by recording a finding that the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years, applied the multiplier of 13 while calculating the compensation. The High Court, curiously while maintaining the multiplier of 13 as per the judgment of this Court in Sarla Verma, has reduced the compensation only on the ground that the deceased was aged 50 years 3 months on the date of the accident, as such the compensation is to be calculated on account of loss of dependency by granting future prospects at 15% but not 30%. So far as the application of multiplier of 13 by the Tribunal is concerned, the High Court has not interfered with the same. When the age of the deceased was considered in the group of 40 to 50 years, we are of the view that the High Court has committed error in granting only 15% towards future prospects instead of 30%. As per the judgments of this Court, primarily the age group is to be considered. Considering the age group as 40 to 50 years, when the multiplier of 13 is maintained by the High Court, there is no reason or justification for reducing the compensation by granting 15% towards future prospects. Though the learned counsel appearing for Respondent 1 Insurance Company has submitted that the compensation towards future prospects was awarded as per the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi3 but at the same time it is to be noticed that in the very same judgment in para 59.3, while considering the grant of future prospects, this Court has specifically said that the addition should be 30% if the age of the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years. For application of multiplier, the High Court has also accepted the age group of the deceased between 40 and 50 years. In that view of the matter, there is no reason for reducing the compensation by granting future prospects at 15% only."

Click Here to Read the rest of this document