Deduction of 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses is not permissible in case of injury under the Motor Vehicles Act.

By The Court—Heard Sri T.J.S.Makker, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri R.P.Singh, learned counsel for the claimants-respondents and perused the record.

2. The New Indian Assurance Company Ltd. has preferred the present F.A.F.O. against the impugned judgment and award dated 28th May, 2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Barabanki in Claim Petition No. 157 of 2001.

3. The brief facts of the case, are that the claimant, Parmeshwar Mishra, when the accident occurred alongwith his wife Kiran Mishra, daughters Abha and Divya, son, Ashutosh Mishra and Km. Manu Mishra were travelling in Ambassador Car No. U.P. 32 A/1246. One Rafiquddin was driving the car carefully. At about 12.30 O’ Clock on 2nd June 2002 on Faizabad-Lucknow Road when the car reached near village-Jarela Bazar, Police Station-Patranga, District-Fiazabad, the vehicle D.C.M. Truck No. U.P. 15 F/1020 coming from reverse direction, hit the car. In consequence thereof, the claimant suffered injuries. The D.C.M. Truck was driven rashly and negligently at the time of accident. In the said accident, Rafiqudduin, Driver of the Car suffered grievous injuries and the F.I.R. No. 117/2004, under sections 279,338,304-A & 427 I.P.C. was lodged. The claimants-respondents approached the Tribunal by preferring the Claim Petition and the Tribunal had awarded the compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,96,000/- after considering evidence led by the parties including the injury report and medical expenses etc.

4. While assailing the impugned award, the solitary argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal had not deduced 1/3rd amount in terms of Schedule-II of the Motor Vehicles Act.

5. On the other hand, Sri R.P.Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that in case of injury, deduction is not permissible under the Motor Vehicles Act. He has relied upon a case reported in 2009 AIR SCW 1430, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Prasad Varma & Ors.

6. In the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (Supra), their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that where the claim is preferred on account of injury caused in an accident, then deduction of 1/3 amount towards personal expenses is not permissible. Relevant portion from the judgment of the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (Supra), is reproduced as under:-

“11. One-third amount is deducted from computation of compensation from the total income on the premise that some expenses were necessary for one’s own survival. Incidentally, we may notice that in the note appended to the Second Schedule, the amount of compensation arrived in the case of fatal accident claims is required to be reduced by one-third in consideration of the expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining himself had he been alive. A person, although alive, but when he is not in a position to move and even for every small thing he has to depend upon the services of another, in our opinion, a direction to deduct 1/3rd of the amount from his total income need not always be insisted upon.

12. Our attention , however, has been drawn to a decision of this court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Charlie and Anr.(2005) 10 SCC 720) where 1/3 rd was directed to be deducted towards personal expenditure, we do not find that any legal principle was laid down therein. It also does not appear that the premise on which such deduction is allowed and what would happen in a case, where such a premise does not exist, did not fall for consideration.

In Charlie (supra), this court itself opined that in a case, where the injured had suffered 100% disability, the legal principle for determination of compensation applicable to a deceased can, in appropriate cases, taking note of all relevant factors be reasonably applied even in a case of totally permanent disabled person. This court referred to Halsbury’s Laws of England, Volume 34, para 98 wherein it was held that the multiplier may be increased wh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document