The multiplier for calculating compensation in fatal accident cases must be based on the age of the deceased. Additionally, courts exercise discretion to restrict the payment of interest on enhanced awards when significant litigation delays are solely attributable to the claimants.

JUDGMENT :

ANISH DAYAL, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded at Rs. 5,98,500/- by impugned judgment dated 23rd December 2026, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal East District, Karkardooma (‘MACT/Tribunal’), in MACT No. 386/2016, arising out of an accident that occurred on 31st August 2014 near Madina Masjid, Ashok Vihar, Loni, wherein the deceased, Mohd. Shahruk, aged 18 years, while riding his motorcycle, was hit by the offending vehicle/bus bearing registration No. UP-17B-3901. The claim petition was filed by the parents of the deceased.

2. Mr. S.N. Parashar, counsel for claimants, contends that the MACT applied a multiplier of ‘13’ on the basis of the age of the mother instead of adopting the multiplier of ‘18’ for the age group 15-20 years, in terms of the principles enunciated in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. (2009) 5 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680.

3. The Supreme Court in the case of Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan (2013) 9 SCC 65, held that the multiplier is to be used with reference to the age of the deceased. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi (supra), affirmed the view taken in Smt. Sarla Verma (supra), and Reshma Kumari (supra), and recorded in the conclusions as under:

“59.7. The age of the deceased should be the basis for applying the multiplier.”

4. Needless to say, the same has to be aligned with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and, to that extent, the plea of the claimants is accepted. Accordingly, the multiplier is modified from ‘13’ to ‘18’

5. The following components of compensation shall also be aligned as per the principles enunciated in Pranay Sethi (supra);

i. Loss of estate will be reduced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 15,000/-.

ii. Funeral expenses will be reduced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 15,000/-;

iii. Loss of love and affection, as per United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur (2021) 11 SCC 780, will be deleted;

iv. Future prospects ought to be 40% as the deceased was 18 years of age, and no evidence of permanent employment is on record; and

v. Loss of consortium will be Rs. 40,000/- x 2 = 80,000/-, as there are two claimants, namely, mother and father of the deceased.

6. Accordingly, compensation is recomputed as under:

7. Mr. JPN Shahi, counsel for the Insurance Company, objects to the grant of interest for the complete period starting from the date of filing of the claim petition, considering that there has been considerable delay on the part of the claimants in pursuing the plea for enhancement.

8. Initially, the claimants filed an application under Section 114 read with Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (‘CPC’), moved on behalf of the appellants, seeking review of judgment award dated 23rd December 2016. The said applica