Bombay High Court Allows Enhancement of Compensation for Death of Assistant Teacher in Motor Vehicle Accident — Applies Multiplier of 15 and Adds 50% Future Prospects. The court recalculated compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, relying on Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi, and upheld joint and several liability of the tortfeasors.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 92
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellants, widow and sons of deceased Dashrath Punju More, filed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon, in MACP No.10 of 2005. The deceased, aged 40 years, was an Assistant Teacher earning Rs. 9,000 per month. He died in a motor vehicle accident on 01-12-2004 when the auto rickshaw he was travelling in collided head-on with a goods truck. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 6,72,000 with interest at 6% per annum, applying a multiplier of 13 and deducting 1/3rd for personal expenses. The High Court found that the multiplier should be 15 as per Sarla Verma v. DTC, and that 50% addition for future prospects should be made as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi. The court recalculated the compensation: monthly income Rs. 9,000, add 50% future prospects = Rs. 13,500, annual income Rs. 1,62,000, deduct 1/3rd for personal expenses = Rs. 1,08,000, apply multiplier 15 = Rs. 16,20,000. Adding Rs. 70,000 under conventional heads (loss of consortium, loss of estate, funeral expenses) as per Pranay Sethi, total compensation comes to Rs. 16,90,000. The court also upheld the Tribunal's finding of contributory negligence equally between the drivers of both vehicles and directed joint and several liability. The appeal was partly allowed, enhancing compensation to Rs. 16,90,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation Enhancement - Multiplier Method - Future Prospects - The court considered the correctness of the multiplier applied and the addition of future prospects for a deceased government employee aged 40 years - Held that the multiplier of 15 should be applied as per Sarla Verma v. DTC, and 50% addition for future prospects is warranted as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (Paras 10-12).

B) Motor Accident Claims - Contributory Negligence - Joint and Several Liability - The Tribunal had held the drivers of both vehicles equally negligent - The court upheld this finding and directed joint and several liability of the respondents - Held that the claimants are entitled to recover the enhanced amount from any of the respondents (Paras 13-14).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was just and proper, and whether the appellants are entitled to enhancement.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal partly allowed. Compensation enhanced from Rs. 6,72,000 to Rs. 16,90,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the enhanced amount.

Law Points

  • Motor Accident Claims
  • Compensation Enhancement
  • Multiplier Method
  • Future Prospects
  • Deduction for Personal Expenses
  • Contributory Negligence
  • Joint and Several Liability
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (08) 22

First Appeal No.1250 of 2012

2019-08-21

Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

Mr. M. M. Bhokarikar for Appellants, Ms. Nayana Patil holding for Ms. Surekha Mahajan for Respondent No.1, Mr. Upadhye V.N. for Respondent No.2, Mr. N.E.Deshmukh for Respondent No.3, Mr. A. G. Kanade for Respondent No.4, Mr. G. V. Wani for Respondent No.6

Smt. Chandrabhaga Dasharath More, Shri. Vivek Dashrath More, Shri. Sandeep Dashrath More

Shri. Jabbarali Ibrahimali Sayyad, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Shri. Malak Rafq Malak Ayub, New India Insurance Company Ltd., Shri. Punju More (Dead)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal for enhancement of compensation in a motor accident claim

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

Filing Reason

The Tribunal awarded Rs. 6,72,000 which the appellants considered inadequate

Previous Decisions

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon awarded Rs. 6,72,000 with interest at 6% per annum in MACP No.10 of 2005 on 06-08-2010

Issues

Whether the multiplier of 13 applied by the Tribunal is correct? Whether future prospects should be added to the income of the deceased? Whether the finding of contributory negligence is correct? Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the multiplier should be 15 as per Sarla Verma and future prospects at 50% should be added as per Pranay Sethi Respondents argued that the Tribunal's award was just and proper

Ratio Decidendi

In motor accident claims, for a deceased aged 40 years, the appropriate multiplier is 15 and 50% addition for future prospects should be made. The compensation is to be calculated by applying the multiplier method as per Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi.

Judgment Excerpts

Present appeal has been fled by the original claimant seeking enhancement in the compensation granted in MACP No.10 of 2005 by learned Member MACT, Jalgaon on 06-08-2010. The multiplier of 13 adopted by the Tribunal is not correct. As per the law laid down in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, the multiplier for the age group of 36 to 40 years is 15. As per the law laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 50% addition for future prospects is required to be made.

Procedural History

The appellants filed MACP No.10 of 2005 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalgaon, which awarded compensation on 06-08-2010. Aggrieved by the quantum, the appellants filed the present First Appeal No.1250 of 2012 before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Enhancement of Compensation for Death of Assistant Teacher in Motor Vehicle Accident — Applies Multiplier of 15 and Adds 50% Future Prospects. The court recalculated compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, relying ...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Quashes Cognizance Order in Air Pollution Case Due to Lack of Sanction — Prosecution under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 Requires Prior Sanction Under Section 43 for Board Complaints Filed Without Authorization.