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

2006 Supreme(P&H) 159

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Ashutosh Mohunta, J.
Rachna Aggarwal
Versus
Ramji Singh
First Appeal from the Order No. 3652 of 2002,
Decided On : JANUARY 18, 2006

The main legal point established in the judgment is the correct calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including the application of multipliers and entitlement to funeral expenses and loss of consortium.

Headnote:

Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166, 168, 171 - The court discussed the calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the application of multipliers, and the entitlement to funeral expenses and loss of consortium. The court held that the Tribunal had erred in applying a lower multiplier and made adjustments to the compensation amount based on the provisions of the Act.

Fact of the Case:

A car met with an accident with a truck, resulting in fatalities and injuries. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to the victims, and the Insurance Company's appeals were dismissed. The widow and minor sons of the deceased filed an appeal for enhancement of compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Tribunal had incorrectly deducted a sum from the deceased's income and applied a lower multiplier for calculating compensation. It set aside the deduction and adjusted the compensation amount based on the correct multiplier and entitlement to funeral expenses and loss of consortium.

Issues: Calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, application of multipliers, and entitlement to funeral expenses and loss of consortium.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Tribunal's deduction from the deceased's income was improper and illegal. It adjusted the compensation amount based on the correct multiplier and entitlement to funeral expenses and loss of consortium.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeal by adjusting the compensation amount and holding the respondents jointly and severally liable to make the payment of compensation to the claimant-appellant.

Judgment

Ashutosh Mohunta, J.

1. A Maruti Esteem Car bearing registration No. CH-01-S-3144, being driven by Manoj Kumar Aggarwal while going from Chandigarh to the shrine of Mata Vaishno Devi on 8.11.1997, met with an accident with the truck bearing registration No. PB-06-2298 (for short the offending truck), which was being driven by Ramji Singh (respondent No. 1), near village Saror in District Jammu. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal died at the spot. His father Parmod Kumar Aggarwal lost his life on 9.11.1997 on account of the injuries suffered by him in the said accident. Kshitiz Singh minor child of Virender Singh, i.e. sisters son of Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, received severe injuries. Three separate claim petitions were filed by Smt. Shashi Aggarwal (widow of Parmod Kumar Aggarwal), Smt. Rachna Aggarwal (widow of Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) along with her minor children, and the minor Kshitiz Singh injured through his father Virender Singh. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short the Tribunal) vide a consolidated judgment dated 24.4.2002 awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 31,20,000/- to the widow and the children of Manoj Kumar Aggarwal deceased; Rs. 9,43,000/- to Smt. Shashi Aggarwal widow of Parmod Kumar Aggarwal deceased and his other legal heirs; and Rs. 25,000/- were awarded to Kshitiz Singh for the personal injuries suffered by him. Besides this, the Tribunal also awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum of the total amount of compensation from the date of claim petition till payment. The truck was insured with respondent Nos. 3 and 4 but respondent No. 1 Ramji Singh driver of the offending truck, was held to be not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. The Tribunal held respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 9 liable jointly and severally to pay the amount of compensation awarded in all the three claim petitions. However, it was ordered by the Tribunal that Insurance Company can recover the amount of compensation from the insured, if so advised. United India Insurance Company Ltd. had earlier filed 3 separate appeals, namely, F.A.O. Nos. 5108, 5109 and 5110 of 2002 wherein challenge had been made to the award of the Tribunal. However this Court vide judgment dated 18.10.2002 has dismissed the appeals filed by the Insurance Company. Present appeal has been filed by Smt. Rachna Aggarwal, widow of Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, and her two minor sons, wherein prayer has been made for enhancement of the amount of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

2. The primary contention raised by Mr. C.B. Goel, learned Counsel for the appellant, is that the Tribunal has erred in making a deduction of Rs. 5,000/- per month (Total Rs. 60,000/- per annum) out of the income of deceased Manoj Kumar Aggarwal under the head "for proper running and profits of the business." The counsel contended that all the expenses incurred in the running of the business are already debited in the accounts and the income tax returns are filed accordingly.

3. The contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant are vehemently controverted by Mr. Maharaj Baksh Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company.

4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on examining the case file, I am of the considered opinion that the Tribunal had illegally deducted a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month (Rs. 60,000/- per annum) under the head "for proper running and profits of the business" on the ground that the deceased certainly would have plougned part of his profits into his business, A look at the impugned judgment shows that the Tribunal had worked out the average income of the deceased on the basis of the Income-tax Returns filed by him during the years 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99. It is the common knowledge that at the time of filing of the income-tax returns, all the expenses incurred in running the business are debited in the accounts of the business. All the profit and loss statements ar

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top