A division bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari enhanced the compensation amount granted to the dependents of a deceased while considering (i) Possible Future Prospects, and (ii) Possible Rise in Income as variables of the Multiplier Method.
Facts:
In a vehicular accident, the husband of the first appellant died. At the relevant time, he was working as mason and aged 48/52 years. The appellants – original claimants – widow and other dependent children filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Preumbavoor (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’). The Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,05,000/- under different heads along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition. While determining the compensation, the Tribunal considered the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,800/- per month and thereafter after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenditure and applying the relevant multiplier awarded the amount of compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs. 1,87,200/-. 2.1 In an appeal before the High Court, by the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has awarded the compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs. 2,97,000/- considering the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenditure of the deceased. Thus, the High Court has enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs. 3,92,000/- under different heads along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order/s passed by the High Court in awarding the future economic loss – loss of dependency at Rs. 2,97,000/- considering the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month, the original claimants have preferred the present appeals.
Observations of the Court:
The court held that assuming that the income of the deceased at the relevant time is considered at Rs. 3,000/- per month, in that case also, while awarding loss of dependency, future prospects and rise in income ought to have been considered. The judges were of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case if 25% of Rs. 3,000/- per month is considered towards future prospects and a rise in income and thereafter loss of dependency is determined, it can be said to be just compensation. Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs. 4,25,000/- under different heads along with interest @ 9% per annum as awarded by the High Court from the date of filing the claim petition till its realization. The impugned judgment and order/s passed by the High Court were modified to the extent of enhancing the amount of compensation to Rs. 4,25,000/- under different heads from Rs. 3,92,000/- awarded by the High Court, along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till its realization. Now, respondent No. 2 – Insurance Company was directed to pay/deposit the balance enhanced amount of compensation along with interest as above with the Tribunal, within a period of eight weeks from today and on such deposit, the same be paid to appellant No.1 – widow of the deceased by an account payee cheque.
Decision:
The concerned appeals were partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no order as to costs.
Case: Sumathy and others vs. Babu and anr.
Citation: Civil Appeal No.s 6609-6610 of 2022
Coram: Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari
Decided on: September 19th, 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source : https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2013/03/11/d8645523-4782-11e3-a5af-047d7b15b92e/college-debt.jpg
