CHAMELI DEVI vs. JIVRAIL MIAN

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 898 SC
Judgement Date : Sep/2019

Headnote :
IMPORTANT

Accidental Death of Carpenter - What evidence can be presented aside from oral testimony? Compensation granted to the Carpenter\'s family.

A. Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation - Income Assessment - The Tribunal determined the deceased\'s income to be Rs. 1,250 per month due to lack of concrete proof of income. The High Court, however, accepted an income of Rs. 3,000 per month, which is still on the lower side. Both the Tribunal and the High Court noted that no evidence was provided to substantiate the claim that the deceased was a carpenter. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to expect that a carpenter can provide oral evidence. Given that the accident occurred in 2001 and the deceased was a carpenter, it is not unreasonable to estimate his income at Rs. 200 per day. Considering that carpenters may not work every day, the income is assessed at Rs. 5,000 per month.

[Para 2]

B. Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation - Income of the deceased is assessed at Rs. 5,000 per month. Adding 40% for future prospects, the total income amounts to Rs. 7,000. After deducting 1/5 for personal expenses, considering the number of dependents, the net figure is Rs. 5,600 per month or Rs. 67,200 annually. Using a multiplier of 16, the compensation totals Rs. 10,75,200. An additional Rs. 70,000 is included for other non-conventional expenses, bringing the total compensation to Rs. 11,45,200. The deceased incurred injuries, and it has been established that Rs. 1,25,000 was spent on his treatment. He received treatment in Delhi for nearly a year and had to travel from Jharkhand to Delhi and back. The amount of Rs. 1,25,000 is considered low as it only accounts for the actual expenses incurred. Therefore, Rs. 2,00,000 is awarded for treatment in Delhi. The total compensation is assessed at Rs. 13,45,200, rounded to Rs. 13,46,000.

[Paras 3 and 4]

Before :- Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 7004 of 2019 [@ Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 33359 of 2017]. D/d. 4.9.2019.

Chameli Devi & Ors. - Appellants

Versus

Jivrail Mian & Ors. - Respondents

For the Appellants :- Mr. Harendra Kumar Singh, Mr. Keshav Thakur, Mr. Ali Safeer Farooqi, Mr. Syed Imtiyaz Ali and Mr. Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Advocates.

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at L 1,250/- per month but since no positive proof of income was led, the income of L 15,000/- per annum was taken as notional income. This obviously is not a correct position of law. The High Court accepted the income at L 3,000/- per month. According to us, the income assessed by the High Court is on the lower side. The accident happened on 02.01.2001. The Tribunal and the High Court held that no proof of income has been produced to show that the deceased was alleged to be a carpenter. We fail to understand what proof a carpenter can lead except to lead oral evidence.

3. Keeping in view the fact that the accident took place in 2001 and the deceased was a carpenter, it would not be unjustified to assess his income at L 200/- per day. It is true that carpenter may not get work every day, hence, we assess the income at L 5000/- per month. Adding 40% for future prospects i.e. L 2,000/-, the total income works out to L 7,000/-. Deducting 1/5 for personal expenses, keeping in view a large number of dependents, the datum figure comes out to L 5,600/- per month or L 67,200/- per year. Applying multiplier of 16, the compensation works out to L 10,75,200/-. L 70,000/- is added towards other non-conventional heads as laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. The total compensation comes out to L 11,45,200/-.

4. The deceased had suffered injuries and it has been proved that L 1,25,000/- were spent on his treatment before his death and L 50,000/- were awarded for his mental agony. As far as mental agony is concerned that unfortunately cannot be granted to the legal heirs and the petition was filed after the death of the deceased. Keeping in view of the fact that the deceased underwent treatment in Delhi for almost one year and he had to be transported from Jharkhand to Delhi and back, we feel that the amount of L 1,25,000/- is on the lower side since it only takes into consideration the actual expenses spent on the injured. There would have been at least one attendant for which expenditure taken at L 2,00/- per day, would amount to L 6,000/- per month. We award an amount of L 2,00,000/- for treatment at Delhi. The total compensation is accordingly assessed at L 13,45,200/- which is rounded off to L 13,46,000/-.

5. In view of the above discussion, the amount awarded is enhanced to L 13,46,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till the payment of the amount. It is ordered accordingly. The amount already paid shall be adjusted and the balance amount be paid to the appellants or be deposited before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

6. The civil appeal stands disposed of. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.