Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. ABDUL NAZEER, INDU MALHOTRA, ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
versus
Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No.2705 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 28548 of 2014)
Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. – Appellants
versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent
With Civil Appeal No.2706 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 12520 of 2015)
Decided On : 30-06-2020
(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 166 – Assessment of compensation – Relevant principles – To arrive at loss of dependency, Tribunal ought to take into consideration three factors, i) Additions/deductions to be made for arriving at the income; ii) Deduction to be made towards personal living expenses of deceased; and iii) Multiplier to be applied with reference to age of deceased – Personal and living expenses of deceased should be deducted from income, to arrive at contribution to family – Age of deceased must be basis for determining multiplier even in case of a bachelor – Deduction towards personal expenses of a bachelor would be 50%, and 50% would be contribution to family – However, in a case where family of bachelor was large and dependant on income of deceased, as in a case where he had a widowed mother, and a large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses could be restricted to 1/3rd and contribution to family be taken as 2/3rd. (Para 8)
(B) Torts – Fatal Motor Accident – Concept of non-pecuniary damage for loss of consortium is one of major heads for awarding compensation – Right to consortium would include company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of deceased, which is a loss to his family – With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with deceased spouse – Parental consortium is granted to child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and training – Filial consortium is right of parents to compensation in case of an accidental death of a child – Most jurisdictions permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on death of a child – Amount awarded to parents is compensation for loss of love and affection, care and companionship of deceased child – Parental Consortium is awarded to children who lose care and protection of their parents in motor vehicle accidents – Tribunals and High Courts are directed to award compensation for loss of consortium, which is a legitimate conventional head – There is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection as a separate head. (Para 8)
(C) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 166 – Death and injury in motor vehicle accident – Compensation of Rs. 1,90,000/- alongwith 9% interest awarded by Tribunal by applying multiplier of 13 – Amount of compensation enhanced to Rs. 96,78,000/- by High Court after making a partial abatement of 50% towards contributory negligence – MACT assumed that deceased was a skilled worker and fixed his income at Rs. 4,000 p.m. – Income of deceased in 1984 as per his Employment Contract Form, was 750 Qatari Riyal p.m. – This document was duly certified by Indian Embassy at Doha – Accident occurred on 18.11.1998, which is 15 years after he shifted to Doha – MACT could not have assumed income of deceased to have remained at Rs. 4,000 p.m. after having worked for over 14 years in Doha – In absence of any other evidence being produced by Claimants, income of deceased would be required to be computed by taking his base salary at 750 Qatari Riyal p.m. in 1984 as a skilled labourer, as reflected in his Employment Contract Form – High Court has committed error in awarding such an exorbitant amount on the basis of an unverified document, authenticity of which was seriously disputed – Deceased had to maintain an establishment there, and incur expenditure for the same in commensurate with high cost of living in a foreign country – High Court rightly deducted 50% of his income towards personal and living expenses – Deceased was a little over 40 years of age at the time of his death – Multiplier of 15 would be appropriate multiplier – Deduction of 50% made by MACT and High Court towards contributory negligence affirmed – Amount of compensation modified to Rs. 19,82,563/- – 50% of total compensation (inclusive of interest) be given to widow of deceased, and balance 50% be divided equally between three children. (Paras 9.1, 9.2, 9.5, 9.8 and 14)
Facts of the case:
Deceased – victim of accident, was residing in Doha, Qatar since 1984. The Employment Contract Form of the deceased dated 21.08.1984 revealed that he was engaged as a labourer initially for a period of one year on a salary of 750 Qatari Riyal p.m., and continued to live in Qatar where he was employed, till he passed away in a motor vehicle accident in India in 1998. High Court vide the impugned Judgment and Order dated 10.03.2014 upheld the findings of the MACT regarding contributory negligence.
Findings of Court:
Claimants had prayed for an amount of Rs. 50 lacs as compensation in their claim petition before the MACT. The High Court has committed an error in awarding such an exorbitant amount on the basis of an unverified document, the authenticity of which was seriously disputed. In the absence of any other evidence being produced by the Claimants, the income of the deceased would be required to be computed by taking his base salary at 750 Qatari Riyal p.m. in 1984 as a skilled labourer, as reflected in his Employment Contract Form.
Result : Appeals disposed of with directions.
Key Points: - The judgment establishes that age of the deceased is basis for multiplier and provides a table/multiplier framework. (!) (!) (!) - It sets standard deductions for personal and living expenses, including 50% for a bachelor or 1/3 to 1/5 scales depending on dependants. (!) (!) (!) (!) - It confirms three conventional heads of compensation (loss of estate, loss of consortium, funeral expenses) and provides fixed guideline amounts and future enhancement framework. (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT :
INDU MALHOTRA, J.
Leave granted.
1. The deceased – Satpal Singh was residing in Doha, Qatar since 1984. The Employment Contract Form of the deceased dated 21.08.1984 revealed that he was engaged as a labourer initially for a period of one year on a salary of 750 Qatari Riyal p.m., and continued to live in Qatar where he was employed, till he passed away in a motor vehicle accident in India in 1998.
2. Satpal Singh was visiting India in November, 1998. On 18.11.1998, he was riding a scooter, with his wife as the pillion rider, when he met with an accident with a Maruti car bearing No. CH-01-M-6284 coming from the opposite direction.
FIR No. 204 dated 18.11.1998 was lodged u/S. 304A, 279, 337, 427 IPC at P.S. Sadar, Rajpura against the driver and owner of the offending car.
The FIR was lodged on the statement of Satinder Kaur – widow of the deceased, wherein she had stated that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Maruti car. It was further stated that the accident took place while her husband was over-taking a tractor-trolley, when the Maruti car was coming at a high speed from the opposite side. This led to the accident, and caused the death of Satpal Singh on the spot.
The Claimant No. 1 i.e. wife of the deceased was also seriously injured. Her right leg and jaw were fractured. The Claimant No. 1 remained in hospital for over a month. A rod was inserted in her leg, and remained in plaster for about 7 to 8 months. The accident led to 25% permanent disability, which is borne out from the Disability Certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon, Patiala.
3. Claim Petition bearing M.A.C. Application No. 152 was filed before the MACT, Patiala (Punjab) on 24.12.1998 u/S. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the widow of the deceased, on behalf of herself and her 3 minor children for compensation on the death of her husband. The Claimants prayed for compensation of Rs. 50 lacs, alongwith Interest @18% p.a. to be paid jointly and severally by the Insurance Company, and the driver and owner of the Maruti car.
3.1. A copy of the FIR was placed before the MACT, as also the Post Mortem Report which recorded the serious head injuries caused by the road accident on the deceased.
3.2. The Claimants filed a photocopy of the Employment Contract Form dated 10.07.1984 certified by the Indian Embassy at Doha, which records the engagement of the deceased as a labourer by the firm Ali Al Fayyad Trading Contracting Est., Doha on a salary of 750 Qatari Riyal p.m., when he first shifted to Qatar.
3.3. The Claimants also placed on record a letter dated 27.06.1997 purported to have been issued by his employer – the High Speed Group to the Counsellor, New Zealand Consulate for issuance of a visa. It was stated that the General Manager of their company, Mr. Satpal Harbans Singh was intending to spend his annual vacation during June – August 1997 in New Zealand, and had been employed by this organization since 1984, and was now drawing a salary of $ 6,700 p.m.
It is relevant to note that this letter was not attested by the Indian Embassy at Doha.
3.4. The Claimants placed on record the Passport of the deceased, which reveals his date of birth as 10.08.1958. The deceased was a little over 40 years of age at the time of the accident.
The passport entries reveal frequent foreign travel during the period 1986 till 1998 when he expired.
4. The MACT vide Award dated 30.03.2001 held that a perusal of the first statement made by Claimant No. 1 – widow of the deceased in the FIR, revealed that her husband was over-taking a tractor–trolley when the accident occurred, because the Maruti car was coming at a high speed from the opposite side. Consequently, the MACT held that it was a case of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased Satpal Singh, as also on the part of the driver of the Maruti car.
4.1. The MACT app
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
