Case Note & Summary
The present appeal arises from a judgment and award dated 07.11.2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Banaskantha, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.129 of 2019. The appellants, legal heirs of deceased Bhikhiben Maganlal Prajapati, sought enhancement of compensation awarded for her death in a motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred on 01.12.2018 at about 1:30 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. when the deceased, a pedestrian, was walking on Abu Highway Road near Waterway, within the jurisdiction of Palanpur West Police Station. A Maruti Swift car bearing registration No. RJ-16-CA-1298, driven rashly and negligently at high speed, dashed against the deceased from behind, causing fatal injuries. The claimants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, which awarded total compensation of Rs. 4,20,000. The appellants challenged the quantum, specifically the assessment of the deceased's age and notional income. The Tribunal had considered the age as 65 years based on the Postmortem Note, despite the Aadhar Card showing 55 years, and applied a multiplier of 7. The notional income was assessed at Rs. 3,000 per month. The High Court, after hearing the appellant's counsel and perusing the record, found merit in the appeal. The Court held that in case of discrepancy in age, the age more beneficial to the claimants should be adopted, and accordingly applied the age of 55 years with a multiplier of 11 as per Sarla Verma v. DTC. The notional income was enhanced to Rs. 4,000 per month as per the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court recalculated the loss of dependency as Rs. 4,75,200, added Rs. 70,000 under conventional heads, and Rs. 30,800 for loss of estate, totaling Rs. 5,76,000. The appeal was allowed in part, enhancing the compensation to Rs. 5,76,000 with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Age Determination - Multiplier - Discrepancy between Postmortem Note (65 years) and Aadhar Card (55 years) - Court held that in case of discrepancy, the age more beneficial to the claimants should be adopted - Applied multiplier of 11 as per Sarla Verma v. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121, based on age of 55 years - Held that the Tribunal erred in using multiplier of 7 applicable for age 65 years (Paras 4-5). B) Motor Accident Claims - Notional Income - Assessment - Deceased was a housewife - Tribunal assessed notional income at Rs. 3,000 per month - Court held that notional income should be Rs. 4,000 per month as per Second Schedule of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Enhanced compensation accordingly (Para 5). C) Motor Accident Claims - Just Compensation - Enhancement - Claimants sought enhancement of compensation - Court recalculated loss of dependency using correct multiplier and notional income, added conventional heads, and enhanced total compensation from Rs. 4,20,000 to Rs. 5,76,000 - Appeal allowed in part (Para 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tribunal erred in assessing the age of the deceased as 65 years based on the Postmortem Note instead of 55 years as per the Aadhar Card, and whether the compensation awarded was just and reasonable.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 07.11.2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) Banaskantha in MACP No.129/2019 is modified. The total compensation is enhanced from Rs. 4,20,000 to Rs. 5,76,000. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Motor Accident Claims
- Compensation
- Multiplier
- Age Determination
- Notional Income
- Just Compensation
