Bombay High Court Reduces Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Due to Deduction of Personal Expenses and Application of Multiplier. Tribunal's award modified by applying multiplier of 11 instead of 13 and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of deceased.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case arises from a motor accident claim filed by the widow, minor son, and mother of the deceased, who died in a vehicular accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 13,52,000/- with interest at 9% per annum. The insurance company appealed, challenging only the quantum of compensation. The High Court examined the Tribunal's application of multiplier and deduction for personal expenses. Following the principles in Sarla Verma v. DTC, the Court held that for a deceased aged 25 years, the multiplier should be 11, not 13. Since the deceased had three dependents (wife, son, and mother), the deduction for personal expenses should be 1/3rd, not 1/5th. The Court recalculated the loss of dependency as Rs. 3,000/- (assumed income) x 12 x 11 x 2/3 = Rs. 2,64,000/-. Adding conventional heads of Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium, Rs. 2,500/- for funeral expenses, and Rs. 2,500/- for loss of estate, the total compensation was reduced to Rs. 2,74,000/-. The interest rate was reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum. The appeal was partly allowed, and the cross-objection by the claimants was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Multiplier - Deduction for Personal Expenses - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The Tribunal had applied multiplier of 13 and deducted 1/5th towards personal expenses of the deceased, who was aged 25 years and married with two dependents. The High Court held that as per Sarla Verma v. DTC, the appropriate multiplier for age 25 is 11, and deduction for personal expenses should be 1/3rd since the deceased had three dependents. Compensation reduced accordingly. (Paras 4-6)

B) Motor Accident Claims - Interest Rate - Section 171 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - The Tribunal awarded interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition. The High Court reduced the rate to 7.5% per annum, following the prevailing trend in similar cases. (Para 7)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was excessive and required reduction in quantum.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is partly allowed. The compensation is reduced from Rs. 13,52,000/- to Rs. 2,74,000/-. The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum. The cross-objection filed by the claimants is dismissed.

Law Points

  • Motor Accident Claims
  • Compensation Calculation
  • Multiplier Method
  • Deduction for Personal Expenses
  • Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act
  • 1988
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (12) 83

First Appeal No.97 of 2017 with Civil Application No.4093 of 2017

2017-12-19

R. M. Savant, Sandeep K Shinde

Ms. Deepika Motagi a/w Mr. Rajesh Kanojia i/by Res Juris for the Appellant, Mr. Avinash M Gokhale for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.

Smt. Soni Mahendra @ Rajesh Nag and ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against quantum of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Remedy Sought

Reduction of compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal.

Filing Reason

The appellant insurance company challenged the quantum of compensation as excessive.

Previous Decisions

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs. 13,52,000/- with interest at 9% per annum.

Issues

Whether the multiplier of 13 applied by the Tribunal was correct? Whether the deduction of 1/5th towards personal expenses was appropriate? Whether the rate of interest at 9% per annum was excessive?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the multiplier should be 11 as per Sarla Verma v. DTC and deduction for personal expenses should be 1/3rd. Respondents supported the Tribunal's award.

Ratio Decidendi

In motor accident claims, the multiplier and deduction for personal expenses must be determined as per the principles laid down in Sarla Verma v. DTC. For a deceased aged 25 years with three dependents, multiplier of 11 and deduction of 1/3rd for personal expenses are appropriate.

Judgment Excerpts

The challenge is only as regards the quantum. Following the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. DTC, the multiplier applicable would be 11 and the deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/3rd. The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum.

Procedural History

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal passed judgment and order dated 18/09/2014 partly allowing MACT Application No.3541 of 2007. The insurance company filed First Appeal No.97 of 2017 challenging the quantum. The claimants filed cross-objection. The appeal was heard and disposed of on 19/12/2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: 166, 171
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Reduces Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Due to Deduction of Personal Expenses and Application of Multiplier. Tribunal's award modified by applying multiplier of 11 instead of 13 and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Incomplete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence. Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was quashed as the prosecution failed to establish a conclusive chain o...