Vijay Chadha And Ors. vs Jasbir Singh And Ors.
2007 Latest Caselaw 146 Del

JUDGMENT

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. Chand Rani, aged 40 years and a housewife received fatal injuries in a road accident, involving a bus bearing No. DEP 4443 on 21.4.1988. She died.

2. Her children, namely, 2 sons and 3 daughters filed a claim petition.

3. All children were unmarried when she died. One son, Ashok was a minor.

4. Since the children of the deceased pray for enhancement of compensation I would be dealing with their respective sub-missions and would be noting the award only in relation to the loss of dependency worked out for the family members.

5. Needless to state, being a housewife, learned Tribunal correctly opined that she had no actual income. However, ignoring the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar , learned Tribunal has proceeded to award compensation on the basis of notional income of Rs. 15,000 per annum. Even from said notional income 1/3rd stands deducted as personal expenses of the deceased.

6. The said notional income has been taken into account by Tribunal as per the Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Second Schedule was inserted in the Act with effect from 14.11.1994 along with incorporation of Section 163-A.

7. Section 163-A is a no fault liability legal provision wherein notwithstanding negligence or rashness not being proved, compensation for death or permanent disability due to an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle enables the injured or the dependants of the deceased to claim and receive compensation as per a formula prescribed under the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

8. But, where rashness or negligence is proved, compensation has to be paid as per known principles of law evolved by the courts over a number of years.

9. In Lata Wadhwa's case , pertaining to an accident due to fire which took place on 3.3.1989 and in which a large number of children and housewives suffered burn injuries, many of them died, Supreme Court considered the question of notional damages. In para 10 following was observed:

(10) So far as the deceased housewives are concerned, in the absence of any data and as the housewives were not earning any income, attempt has been made to determine the compensation, on the basis of services rendered by them to the house. On the basis of the age group of the housewives, appropriate multiplier has been applied, but the estimation of the value of the services rendered to the house by the housewives, which has been arrived at Rs. 12,000 per annum in cases of some and Rs. 10,000 for others, appears to us to be grossly low. It is true that the claimants, who ought to have given data for determination of compensation, did not assist in any manner by providing the data for estimating the value of the services rendered by such housewives. But even in the absence of such data and taking into consideration the multifarious services rendered by the housewives for managing the entire family, even on a modest estimation, should be Rs. 3,000 per month, that is, Rs. 36,000 per annum. This would apply to all those housewives between the age group of 34 and 59 and as such who were active in life. The compensation awarded, therefore, should be recalculated, taking the value of the services rendered per annum to be Rs. 36,000 and thereafter applying the multiplier, as has been applied already and so far as the conventional amount is concerned, the same should be Rs. 50,000 instead of Rs. 25,000 given under the report. So far as the elderly ladies are concerned, in the age group of 62 to 72, the value of services rendered has been taken at Rs. 10,000 per annum and the multiplier applied is eight. Though, the multiplier applied is correct, but value of services rendered at Rs. 10,000 p.a. cannot be held to be just and we, therefore, enhance the same to Rs. 20,000 per annum. In their case, therefore, total amount of compensation should be redetermined, taking the value of services rendered at Rs. 20,000 per annum and then after applying the multiplier, as already applied and thereafter adding Rs. 50,000 towards the conventional figure.

10. In the instant case, death of the deceased has been established to be the consequences of negligent driving of the bus in question by the driver.

11. Thus, compensation would have to be granted dehors Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

12. In Lata Wadhwa's case , no deduction was made on account of personal expenses of the deceased housewives. Obviously for the reason, a housewife's contribution is measured not in the context of actual money received by her. It has to be measured by assigning a money value to the services which she renders to the family.

13. Learned Counsel for the appellants is, therefore, right in urging that Chand Rani's contribution to the family should be assessed at Rs. 3,000 per month, i.e., Rs. 36,000 per annum.

14. Counsel urges that the multiplier to be adopted should be 15. But, the counsel forgets that he is attempting to use the multiplier which is set out in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

15. Unfortunately, the decision in Lata Wadhwa's case , does not indicate the multiplier to be adopted for housewives bricketed between the age group of 34-59 who were treated as one category as far as their monthly contribution to the family was concerned.

16. The issue accordingly needs a little elaboration.

17. As the children would grow, daughters would get married, as indeed they have. The sons would get married and have their families. The contribution of the mother to the family in terms of her labour would decrease. For all one would know, she may have been lucky enough to be the beneficiary of services rendered to her and the family by the children and her daughters-in-law.

18. The housewives contribution to the family would, therefore, depend upon the age of the children and of course even her husband.

19. Over the next 10 years, children of Chand Rani would have settled in life, probably, leading a happy married life.

20. A multiplier of 10 would, therefore, be reasonable.

21. Loss of dependency to the family, therefore, works out to Rs. 3,000 x 12 x 10 : Rs. 3,60,000.

22. As noted above, the accident took place on 21.4.1988. Funeral expenses of Rs. 2,000 and conventional damages for loss of mother's love and affection to the children are computed at Rs. 15,000. The total compensation comes to Rs. 3,77,000. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,15,000. The compensation would accordingly be enhanced by further sum of Rs. 2,62,000.

23. The enhanced compensation shall be paid to appellants who have survived the deceased in equal proportion. The enhanced compensation shall be paid with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition till date of realisation.

24. No costs.