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

2023 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 18717

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sudeepti Sharma, J
Harsial Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jaswant Singh – Respondent
FAO-594-2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: I.S. Kooner
For the Respondents: Vikas Chatrath

Amounts received under life or personal accident insurance policies by beneficiaries cannot be deducted from compensation awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act, as such benefits arise from private contracts and are independent of the death caused by the motor accident.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - Death in motor accident - Compensation - Deductions - Whether personal accident insurance benefits can be deducted from compensation - Court held that amounts received under life insurance or personal accident insurance policies cannot be deducted while computing compensation as they are outcomes of private contractual relations and not result of the death. (Paras 10-13)

(B) Compensation - Quantum - Enhancement - Future prospects, loss of estate, loss of consortium, and funeral expenses - Court re-assessed compensation by applying 40% future prospects and adjusting conventional heads as per settled law. (Paras 14-15)

(C) Interest - Rate of interest - Courts awarded 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing the claim petition. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
The appellants filed an appeal against the tribunal award claiming the compensation was inadequate and that the tribunal erred in deducting Rs.6,02,000/- received as personal accident insurance claim from the final compensation amount.

Findings of Court:
The Court held the deduction of the insurance amount was unjustified. It re-calculated the total compensation to Rs.16,53,356/-, resulting in an enhancement of Rs.6,14,048/-.

Issues: Whether the personal accident insurance claim amount is deductible from the compensation awarded under the Act, and whether the compensation should be enhanced based on current legal precedents.

Ratio Decidendi: Beneficial legislation requires that insurance benefits earned by the deceased through private contracts do not reduce the liability of the tortfeasor to provide 'just compensation'.

Result: Appeal allowed; enhanced compensation awarded with 9% interest.

Table of Content
1. overview of claim petition and appeal scope regarding compensation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contentions regarding inadequate assessment of compensation and improper deductions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. settled legal precedents governing calculation of compensation and consortium. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. prohibition of deducting personal insurance benefits from compensation and assessment of heads. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
5. final calculation of enhanced compensation and directions for disbursement. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

*****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 08.08.2022 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation, granted to the claimants/appellants to the tune of Rs.10,39,308/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, on account of death of Sukhchain Singh in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 13.01.2020.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contends that the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. He also contends that the learned Tribunal has erred in deducting the amount on the account of personal accidental claim. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and amount of compensation be enhanced as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company, however, vehemently argues that the award has rightly been passed and the amount of compensation, as assessed by the learned Tribunal has rightly been granted. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the whole record of this case with his able assistance.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are as under:-

“30. 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 standardised deductions. Having a 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 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.

31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut drastically. Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income and will not be considered as a dependant and the mother alone will be considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, brothers and sisters will not be considered as dependants, because they will either be independent and earning, or married, or be dependent on the father.

32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only d the mother would be considered to be a depe

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