Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rajendrasinh Narendrasinh Jadeja, filed a first appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 14.06.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Bhuj at Kachchh in MACP No.3 of 2003. The Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs.1,07,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. The appellant, who was 19 years old at the time of the accident on 20.10.2002, sustained grievous injuries while riding a motorcycle when a jeep driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner dashed into him. The appellant claimed he was employed as a Lab Assistant earning Rs.52,000/- per annum. The Insurance Company contested the claim. The Tribunal assessed the income at Rs.52,000/- per annum but applied a multiplier of 15 and made deductions, leading to the low award. The High Court, on appeal, examined the evidence and found that the Tribunal had erred in applying the multiplier. Following the principles in Sarla Verma v. DTC and Pranay Sethi, the Court held that the appropriate multiplier for a 19-year-old is 18, and 40% should be added for future prospects. After deducting 1/3rd for personal expenses, the total loss of earning capacity was computed as Rs.10,92,000/-. The Court also awarded Rs.70,000/- under other heads (pain, suffering, medical expenses, etc.), making the total compensation Rs.11,62,000/-. The appeal was allowed, and the award was enhanced accordingly, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Compensation - Assessment of Income - The Tribunal had assessed the claimant's income at Rs. 52,000/- per annum based on evidence, but the High Court found that the claimant had proved his income as a Lab Assistant. The Court held that the income should be taken as Rs. 52,000/- per annum and applied a multiplier of 18 as per the age of the claimant (19 years) following the principles in Sarla Verma v. DTC. (Paras 5-7) B) Motor Accident Compensation - Future Prospects - The Court considered that the claimant was 19 years old and had a stable job, and thus granted 40% addition towards future prospects as per the decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi. (Para 7) C) Motor Accident Compensation - Contributory Negligence - The Tribunal had not attributed any contributory negligence to the claimant, and the High Court upheld this finding as the accident was caused solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep driver. (Para 4) D) Motor Accident Compensation - Computation of Compensation - The High Court recalculated the compensation by taking the income as Rs. 52,000/- per annum, adding 40% for future prospects, applying multiplier 18, and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, resulting in a total compensation of Rs. 10,92,000/- along with interest at 7.5% per annum. (Paras 7-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was just and proper, and whether the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the claimant and applying the multiplier.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 14.06.2012 is modified. The appellant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.11,62,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Assessment of income for compensation
- multiplier application
- future prospects
- contributory negligence
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
