Back
2022 Supreme(All) 187
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, J.
Smt. Kamleshwari – Appellant
Versus
Shiv Murti Lal – Respondent
First Appeal From Order No. 356 of 1992
Decided on : 08-03-2022
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation
Act Referred
Headnote
Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - The court modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal based on the deceased's income, future prospects, and multiplier applicable under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal challenges the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, awarding compensation to the claimants for the death of the sole breadwinner in a motor accident.
Finding of the Court:
The court modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, considering the deceased's income, future prospects, and applicable multiplier, and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the modified amount with interest.
Issues: The only issue to be decided was the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the deceased's income, future prospects, and applicable multiplier under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to determine the modified compensation.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal were modified. The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the modified amount with interest, and a fresh award was to be drawn by the tribunal accordingly.
Advocate Appeared:
V.C.Srivastava, A.K. Shukla
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri A.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent. None appears for Insurance company though 30 years have elapsed since sending notice.
2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 18.12.1991 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/IX Addl. District Judge, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No. 174 of 1987 awarding a sum of Rs. 30,000/-with interest at the rate of 12% as compensation. Thirty years have passed by when mother and younger brother lost the sole bread winner.
3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them. The only issue to be decided is the quantum of compensation awarded.
4. The deceased was a security-guard. The deceased was survived by mother and younger brother. He is deposed to be earning Rs.800/-per month. The Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased to be Rs.800/-per month in the year 1987 and granted multiplier of 5 only and did not add any amount under the head of future loss of income and for medical expenses has granted Rs. 3,000/-and Rs.3,000/-for funeral expenses.
5. Learned Counsel for the respondents states that the award does not require any interference as the law as propounded under Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, did not specify any amount to be paid under the head of future loss of income nor the U.P. Rules specify the same. The deceased was a bachelor and, therefore, deduction of ½ is just and proper. The multiplier of 5 in those days was considered as just and proper.
6. After hearing the counsel for the parties and after perusing the judgment and order impugned, this Court comes to the conclusion that the income of Rs. 800/-granted by the Tribunal is just and proper, to which as the deceased was in the age bracket of 36 -40 years, 40% will have to be added and multiplier of 15 would apply. Hence, the compensation payable to the appellants in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi (Supra) is computed herein below:
| i. Income | Rs.800/-per month |
| ii. Percentage towards future prospects : 40% namely | Rs.320/- |
| iii. Total income : Rs. 800 + 320 | Rs. 1,120/- |
| iv. Income after deduction of ½ | Rs. 560/- |
| v. Annual income : Rs.560 x 12 | Rs.6,720/- |
| vi. Multiplier applicable | 15 |
| vii. Loss of dependency | Rs.6,720 x 15 = Rs. 1,00,800/- |
| viii. Amount under non pecuniary heads | Rs.40,000/- |
| ix. Amount under medical expenses | Rs. 3,000/- |
| x. Total compensation | Rs. 1,43,800/- |
7. No other grounds are urged orally when the matter was heard.
8. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the amount is deposited within a period of 12 weeks from today. The amount already deposited be deducted from the amount to be deposited.
9. Fresh Award be drawn accordingly in the above petition by the tribunal as per the modification made herein.
10. This Court is thankful to both the counsels to see that this very old matter is disposed of.
