Back
V.GOPALA GOWDA, R.BANUMATHI
SHASHIKALA – Appellant
Versus
GANGALAKSHMAMMA – Respondent
How should income be determined for compensation in motor accident claims using income tax returns? What is the procedure for a two-judge bench to refer a matter to a larger bench? What constitutes "just compensation" under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act?
Key Points: - Supreme Court enhanced compensation from Rs.14,69,372 (High Court) to Rs.19,32,310 for claimants after motor accident death of self-employed deceased aged 45 years (!) [1000564780018]. - High Court erred by averaging income from IT returns of 2005-06 (Rs.1,08,713) and 2006-07 (Rs.2,02,911); Court adopted latest 2006-07 income of Rs.2,02,911, deducted income tax (10%), professional tax (Rs.2,400), house property income (Rs.20,000), and 1/4th personal expenses to arrive at annual dependency loss of Rs.1,20,165 [1000564780008][1000564780009][1000564780015]. - Multiplier of 14 applied considering deceased's age of 45 years, resulting in loss of dependency of Rs.16,82,310 [1000564780016]. - Conventional heads awarded liberally: Rs.1,00,000 loss of consortium, Rs.1,00,000 loss of love and affection, Rs.25,000 funeral expenses, Rs.25,000 loss of estate, totaling Rs.2,50,000 [1000564780017]. - Question of adding future prospects to income of self-employed persons left open, pending decision by larger Bench due to conflicting views in Reshma Kumari (2013) 9 SCC 65 and Rajesh (2013) 9 SCC 54 (!) [1000564780012] (!) . - Two-judge Bench cannot directly refer matter to five-judge or larger Bench; can only refer to three-judge Bench, subject to CJI constituting larger Bench (!) (!) (!) . - "Just compensation" under Section 168 of Motor Vehicles Act must be fair and reasonable, not arbitrary or a windfall [1000564780014] (!) . - Enhanced compensation of Rs.4,62,938 payable with 9% interest from claim petition date; apportioned among wife and children [1000564780018].
JUDGMENT
R. BANUMATHI, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of judgment in M.F.A. No.136/2009 (MV) dated 15.7.2013 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, in and by which, the High Court modified the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short ‘the tribunal’) by enhancing the compensation to Rs.14,69,372/-from Rs.7,85,000/-awarded by the tribunal.
3. Appellant No.1 is the wife, appellants No.2 to 4 are children and appellants No.5 to 6 are the parents of the deceased Late Shri H.S. Ravi. The appellants have filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act on account of death of deceased Sri H.S. Ravi who had met with an accident on 14.12.2006. On the fateful day, the deceased Ravi was proceeding in a motor cycle as a pillion rider. The rider of the motor cycle applied sudden brake due to which both rider and pillion rider fell down and both sustained grievous injuries. The rider of the motor cycle died on the spot. Ravi who was a pillion rider sustained grievous injuries and was immediately rushed to the hospital. However, after six days i.e. on 20.12.2006, deceased–Ravi succumbed to the injuries. Deceased–Ravi was aged 45 years and he was engaged
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
