Bombay High Court Partially Allows Insurance Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation from Rs.11,03,500 to Rs.9,63,500. Court holds that future prospects should be added at 40% for self-employed mason aged 35, and multiplier of 16 is appropriate under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. against the judgment and award dated 30.11.2016 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wardha in M.A.C.P. No. 26/2015. The claimants, widow and daughters of deceased Gunwanta, sought compensation for his death in a motor vehicle accident on 19.12.2014. The deceased was a 35-year-old mason earning Rs.500 per day. The Tribunal awarded Rs.11,03,500 with 9% interest. The Insurance Company challenged the award on grounds of excessive compensation and incorrect application of multiplier and future prospects. The High Court held that future prospects of 40% should be added as per Pranay Sethi, the multiplier should be 16 as per Sarla Verma, and deduction of 1/4th for personal expenses was correct. The court recalculated compensation: notional income Rs.6,000 per month, plus 40% future prospects = Rs.8,400, minus 1/4th deduction = Rs.6,300, multiplied by 12 and multiplier 16 = Rs.12,09,600, plus conventional heads Rs.70,000 = Rs.12,79,600. However, since the claimants did not cross-appeal, the court reduced the award to Rs.9,63,500 (the amount awarded by Tribunal minus Rs.1,40,000 for future prospects and multiplier correction) and reduced interest to 7.5% per annum. The appeal was partly allowed.

Headnote

A) Motor Accident Compensation - Future Prospects - Self-Employed Person - Addition of 40% for future prospects is permissible for a self-employed mason aged 35 years under the principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi - Held that the Tribunal erred in not adding future prospects, and the High Court added 40% to the notional income (Paras 7-9).

B) Motor Accident Compensation - Multiplier - Age of Deceased - Multiplier of 16 is applicable for a deceased aged 35 years as per Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation - Held that the Tribunal's use of multiplier 17 was incorrect, and the High Court corrected it to 16 (Paras 10-11).

C) Motor Accident Compensation - Deduction for Personal Expenses - Number of Dependents - Deduction of 1/4th for personal expenses is correct when there are four dependents - Held that the Tribunal's deduction of 1/4th was proper (Para 12).

D) Motor Accident Compensation - Interest Rate - Reduction from 9% to 7.5% - In view of the prevailing rate of interest, the High Court reduced the interest rate from 9% to 7.5% per annum - Held that the interest rate is modified (Para 13).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal erred in awarding compensation without adding future prospects and in applying the correct multiplier and deduction for personal expenses.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is modified. The compensation is reduced from Rs.11,03,500 to Rs.9,63,500. The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum from the date of application till realization. The award is modified accordingly.

Law Points

  • Future prospects for self-employed persons
  • Multiplier determination
  • Deduction for personal expenses
  • Interest rate on compensation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (08) 190

First Appeal No. 493 of 2018

2018-08-09

V. M. Deshpande, J.

Mr. M. B. Joshi for appellant, Mr. S. K. Bhoyar for respondent nos.1 to 3, 5 and 6

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Smt. Savita Wd/o Gunwanta Shete & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation for death in motor vehicle accident.

Remedy Sought

The appellant Insurance Company sought reduction of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Filing Reason

The Insurance Company challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, arguing that the Tribunal erred in not adding future prospects and in applying incorrect multiplier and deduction.

Previous Decisions

The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wardha in M.A.C.P. No. 26/2015 awarded Rs.11,03,500 with 9% interest per annum.

Issues

Whether the Tribunal erred in not adding future prospects to the income of the deceased? Whether the multiplier of 17 applied by the Tribunal was correct? Whether the deduction of 1/4th for personal expenses was proper? Whether the rate of interest at 9% per annum was excessive?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the Tribunal did not add future prospects, applied multiplier 17 instead of 16, and awarded excessive interest. Claimants supported the award and argued that the compensation was just and fair.

Ratio Decidendi

In motor accident compensation cases, for a self-employed deceased aged 35 years, future prospects of 40% should be added to the notional income, multiplier of 16 should be applied, and deduction of 1/4th for personal expenses is appropriate when there are four dependents. Interest rate may be reduced to 7.5% per annum considering prevailing rates.

Judgment Excerpts

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, the addition of future prospects to the extent of 40% is permissible. The multiplier of 16 is applicable for the age group of 31 to 35 years as per Sarla Verma. The deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses is correct. The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum.

Procedural History

The claim petition M.A.C.P. No. 26/2015 was filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wardha, which awarded compensation on 30.11.2016. The Insurance Company filed First Appeal No. 493 of 2018 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. Notice was issued on 11.04.2018, and the appeal was heard finally on 09.08.2018.

Acts & Sections

  • Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: Section 166
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Partially Allows Insurance Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation from Rs.11,03,500 to Rs.9,63,500. Court holds that future prospects should be added at 40% for self-employed mason aged 35, and multiplier of 16 is a...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Notification Denying Furlough to Convicts Under Section 364 IPC — Rule 4(13) of Furlough and Parole Rules Held Ultra Vires. The Court held that the classification of convicts under Section 364 IPC as ineligible for furloug...