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

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 10441

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ
MANORMA SINHA & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR. – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL No. …… OF 2025 (@ Special Leave to Appeal (C) no. 19878/2022)



Allowances must be included in dependency loss calculations for fair compensation determinations.

Headnote:The appeal arises from a judgment reducing compensation awarded by the Tribunal, primarily concerning the calculation of loss of dependency and allowances. The Court found errors in excluding allowances in compensation calculations and inappropriate deductions for income tax. It ultimately enhanced compensation to Rs. 74,43,631, asserting allowances are crucial in calculating dependency loss. The final decision modifies the lower court's ruling on compensation.

Result: Appeal allowed; compensation enhanced.

Table of Content
1. compensation was reduced by the high court and questioned by the appellants. (Para 2 , 4)
2. high court's deductions caused discrepancies in compensation calculation. (Para 6)
3. court affirmed allowance inclusion and reassessed future prospects. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 14)
4. final compensation determination upheld adjustments and interest calculations. (Para 15 , 16)

MANOJ MISRA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises out of judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna1 dated 04.07.2022 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 804 of 2017, whereby the compensation awarded by the XIth Additional District and Sessions Judge – cum - Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muzaffarpur, [Digitally signed by] in Claim Case No. 196 of 2011 was reduced from Rs. 88,20,454 to Rs. 38,15,499.

Signature Not Verified CHETAN ARORA Date: 2025.10.15

1 R 6 e : a 4 s 4 o :3 n 3 :

IST

1 High Court

2 Tribunal

3. As liability to pay compensation is not in issue, the question that arises for our consideration is whether the High Court was justified in reducing the compensation payable to the appellant.

4. The operative part of the award passed by the Tribunal including computation of compensation is found in paragraphs 10 to 12 of the award, which are reproduced below:

“10. Multiplier: So far quantum of compensation is concerned, the proper multiplier will be 18 as per Schedule-II of the M.V. Act , as the age of deceased was 27 years as per evidence on record.

As per Ext. A & A/1 submitted by O.P. No. 2 Insurer (Insurance Company) and also Ext. 1 salary slip submitted by Claimant the salary of the deceased for the month of Feb., 2011 was as under:

Basic Pay – Rs. 26,420/- D.A.: 43% - Rs. 11,360/-

Local Allowance:

10% - Rs. 2,642/- Other allowances:

49% i.e. Rs. 12,945.80 Thus, total salary of deceased comes to Rs.

53,367 per month. Therefore, loss of dependency would come to Rs. 53,367 x 12 x 18 = Rs.

1,15,27,272/-

Out of which ½ his personal expenses would be deducted and then loss of dependency would be Rs. 57,63,636/-. In which 50% future prospects would be added i.e. amount Rs. 28,81,818/- then loss of dependency would be Rs. 86,45,454/-.

11. In addition, the claimants are entitled to get a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- under the head of loss of estate, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 15,000/- as funeral expenses.

Thus, total compensation will be Rs. 88,70,454/- Hence, claimants are entitled to get Rs. 88,70,454/- with interest thereon at the rate of 6%

per annum.

12. Perusal of case record it is evident that claimants have already received Rs. 50,000/- as ad-interim compensation U/s. 140 M.V. Act . Hence, this amount would be adjusted from the amount of Rs. 88,70,454/-. Then it comes to Rs. 88,20,454/- as total compensation U/s. 166 M.V. Act . Hence claimants are entitled to get the said amount with interest thereon @ 6% per annum.

Therefore, it is, ORDERED That the O.P. No. 2 Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Muzaffarpur is directed to pay the total compensation amount of Rs. 88,20,454/- to the claimants within two months with interest thereon @ 6% per annum from the date of filing till the date of realization failing which the law will take its own course.”

5. On an appeal preferred by the Insurance Company (the respondent herein), the High Court computed the compensation in the following manner:

“In view of the above, the computation of the claim of the appellant would be as follows:

1. Monthly basic salary Rs. 26,420/- 2. D.A. (43%) Rs. 11,360/- 3. Future prospect @ 40% Rs. 15,892/-

Rs. 52,892/-

4. Yearly income (52,892 x 12) Rs. 6,34,704/- 5. Less of 30% income tax -1,90,411/-

Rs. 4,44,293/-

6. Less of 50% personal expense - 2,22,146/-

(unmarried) Rs. 2,22,147

7. Multiplier (17 x 2,22147) Rs. 37,76,499/-

8. Conventional head (unmarried) + 39,000 (30,000 + 3,000 each in 2014, 2017 and 2020) Rs. 38,15,499/-

The aforesaid total amount of Rs. 38,15,499/- shall be paid by the Insurance Company to the respondent/claimants within a peri

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