Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a motor accident claim where the son of respondents no. 1 and 2 (claimants) died due to negligence of drivers of two vehicles: a Commander Jeep insured with the appellant (New India Assurance) and another vehicle insured with respondent no. 5 (National Insurance). The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, in Claim Petition No. 28 of 1997, awarded Rs. 2,84,000 with 8% interest per annum, holding the appellant and the owner of the offending vehicle jointly and severally liable. The appellant insurer appealed, contending that the Tribunal should have fastened proportionate liability on respondent no. 5 (the co-insurer) and that the multiplier of 17 was too high. The claimants opposed, arguing that the Tribunal correctly applied Sarla Verma principles. The High Court held that in composite negligence, each wrongdoer is jointly and severally liable, and the insurer cannot seek contribution in its appeal. On compensation, the Court found that the deceased was a bachelor aged 25 years, and as per Sarla Verma, the appropriate multiplier for his age is 18, but considering the age of the parents (62 and 58 years), the multiplier should be restricted to 13. The Court also held that 50% of the income should be deducted for personal expenses, not 1/3rd. The Court recalculated the compensation: notional income Rs. 15,000 per annum, 50% deducted for personal expenses, leaving Rs. 7,500 as dependency, multiplied by 13 = Rs. 97,500, plus Rs. 5,000 for funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000 for loss of estate, total Rs. 1,07,500. The award was reduced from Rs. 2,84,000 to Rs. 1,07,500 with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition. The appeal was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Composite Negligence - Joint and Several Liability - Where death results from negligence of two or more wrongdoers, each wrongdoer is jointly and severally liable to the claimants - The insurer of one vehicle cannot seek proportionate contribution from the co-insurer in the appeal filed by it, as the claimants are entitled to recover the entire amount from any joint tortfeasor (Paras 4-5). B) Motor Accident Claims - Determination of Compensation - Multiplier - For a bachelor deceased aged 25 years, the appropriate multiplier as per Sarla Verma is 18, but considering the age of parents (62 and 58 years), the multiplier should be restricted to 13 - The Tribunal's use of multiplier 17 was erroneous (Paras 6-7). C) Motor Accident Claims - Deduction for Personal Expenses - For a bachelor deceased, deduction of 50% towards personal expenses is appropriate as per Sarla Verma - The Tribunal's deduction of 1/3rd was incorrect; 1/2 should be deducted (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal erred in applying multiplier 17 instead of appropriate multiplier based on deceased's age, and whether the appellant insurer is entitled to contribution from the co-insurer in case of composite negligence.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. The impugned award is modified. The compensation is reduced from Rs. 2,84,000 to Rs. 1,07,500 with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The appellant and the owner of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the same. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Composite negligence
- joint and several liability
- multiplier determination
- deduction for personal expenses
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
