Allahabad High Court
Preeti And 4 Others vs I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance ... on 30 October, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:191082
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 4192 of 2018
Preeti And 4 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)
:
Mayank
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
Rahul Sahai
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.
1. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 14.09.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.5, Mathura in M.A.C.P. No.442 of 2016 (Smt. Preeti and others vs. I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. and others), whereby for the untimely death of Radhey Shyam in a motor accident that occurred on 22.7.2016, a compensation of Rs.10,33,300/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum has been awarded to claimants, which has been ordered to be indemnified by the insurer of the offending vehicle.
2. Since, no cross-appeal has been filed by the owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle, as such, the issue of accident and negligence is not being examined in this appeal, and only the issue of quantum of compensation is being considered.
3. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants submitted that the Tribunal has awarded less amount of compensation because it has not determined the compensation on the basis of minimum wages of unskilled labour prevailing at the time of the accident, the Tribunal has awarded less amount towards loss of future prospects, loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the Tribunal has also awarded less amount of interest on the compensation awarded by it.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- insurance company submitted that there was no documentary proof regarding profession, educational qualification or income of the deceased, as such, the Tribunal has awarded the right amount of compensation to the claimants looking in the facts and circumstance of the case.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment and relevant documents submitted with the appeal.
6. The claimants claimed that the deceased Radhey Shyam was employed as a driver in MKD RMD Mixture Plant, NH-2, village Chatikara, Mathura and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month, but no documentary evidence was submitted by the claimants to prove the above income of the deceased. The claimants submitted that, as per the driving licence of the deceased, which was valid from 17.02.2011 to 03.02.2028, it is proved that the deceased was a professional driver. In such circumstances, even if he was not employed at the time of the accident, he would be deemed to be a skilled worker. Consequently, the claimants are entitled to compensation on that basis.
7. The Apex Court in the case of Gurpreet Kaur and Others vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and Others 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1778 and Jitendra vs. Sadiya & Others 2025 SCC OnLine SC 261 has held that where there is no documentary proof of income and profession, then the compensation should be determined at-least in accordance with the minimum wages paid to an unskilled workman at the time of the accident. In this case, the deceased was a professional driver, as such, the claimants are entitled to get compensation on the basis of minimum wages for a skilled workman prevailing at the time of the accident, which was Rs.8,758/- per month.
8. According to Rule 220-A of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicle Rules, 1998, the claimants are also entitled to get future prospects @ 50%, since, the deceased was aged below 40 years on the date of the accident. Besides that, in accordance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.(2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, claimants are entitled to a consortium of Rs.40,000/- each towards spousal consortium, parental consortium and filial consortium, as well as Rs.15,000 each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, which is to be enhanced by 10% after every three years. Since, the deceased was aged about 31 years, the Tribunal has correctly applied the multiplier of 16 while determining the compensation.
9. In view of the above legal position, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation, which is redetermined as under:-
S.No.
Compensation Heads
Amount Awarded in Rs.
In Accordance with.
1.
Monthly income of deceased(as per the minimum wages of skilled workman)
8,758/-
Gurpreet Kaur (supra) & Jitendra (supra)
2.
Annual Income of deceased
8,758X12=1,05,096/-
Pranay Sethi (supra)
3.
Less 1/4th deduction towards self expenses (since number of dependents is 5)
26,274/-
Pranay Sethi(supra)
4.
Net annual income on which claimants were dependent
78,822/-
Pranay Sethi (supra)
5.
Add future prospects @50% since deceased was aged less than 40 years
39,411/-
Rule 220-A of UP Motor Vehicle Rules,1998
6.
Total annual dependency of claimants on deceased
1,18,233/-
Pranay Sethi(supra)
7.
Multiplier applied since age of deceased was about 31 years
Pranay Sethi(supra)
8.
Total loss of dependency to the claimants
1,18,233 x 16 =18,91,728/-
Pranay Sethi(supra)
9.
Loss of consortium @Rs.40,000/-each, increased by 10% after every 3 years (5 dependents)
48,400X5=2,42,000/-
Pranay Sethi(supra) and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra)
10.
Loss of estate @ Rs.15,000/- increased by 10% after every 3 years.
18,150/-
Pranay Sethi(supra)
11.
Funeral Expenses @ Rs.15,000/- increased by 10% after every 3 years.
18,150/-
Pranay Sethi(supra)
12.
Treatment expenses
(as awarded by the tribunal)
1,01,299/-
-
13.
Total compensation
22,71,327/-
10. In this way, the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.22,71,327 /- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till it?s actual payment, which is to be indemnified by the insurer of the offending Wagonr Car No. HR-29-AE-2453.
11. The appeal is allowed. The award of the tribunal is modified to the above extent.
12. If any amount has been paid by the insurance company previously, then the insurance company is entitled to adjust it accordingly. The insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation before the concerned tribunal within one month. The tribunal will be at liberty to proportionally award the enhanced amount of compensation to the claimants, keeping in view their age and dependency.
13. The original record of the lower court be sent back, forthwith.
(Sandeep Jain,J.)
October 30, 2025
Jitendra
