Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahendra Pal And 2 Ors. vs Mo.Sabir And 2 Ors. on 10 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
1 MA-3247-2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 10th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
MISC. APPEAL No. 3247 of 2010
MAHENDRA PAL AND 2 ORS. AND OTHERS
Versus
MO.SABIR AND 2 ORS. AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Romil Malpani, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Sudhir Dandwate, learned counsel for respondent No.3 /
Insurance Company.
ORDER
The appellant has filed this Misc. Appeal under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act being aggrieved by the award dated 20.08.2010 passed
by learned VI, Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore
(M.P.) in Claim Case No.01/2009, whereby challenging the quantum of
compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 04.12.2008 at around 10:30
AM, the wife of appellant No.1 and mother of appellants No.2 and 3
deceased Rekha Kothari was travelling by auto rikshaw. She alighted from
the auto rickshaw in front of Rajas Eye Hospital and was proceeding on foot
towards the hospital when respondent No.2 driving the bus bearing
registration number MP-09-S-9370 in a rash and negligent manner coming
from the wrong side, struck the deceased Rekha causing grievous injuries.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
2 MA-3247-2010
She was rushed to M.Y. Hospital, where she was declared dead.
2.1 The appellants / claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the death of Rekha.
The Tribunal after recording the evidence, concluded that the accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the insured vehicle.
Accordingly, a total compensation of Rs.3,46,000/- was awarded to the
appellants. However, while quantifying the compensation, the Tribunal did
not accept the income tax returns of the deceased Rekha and instead assessed
her income on a notional basis at Rs.3,000/- per month for the purpose of
calculating loss of dependency.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that Exs. P-14 to P-16
are the income tax returns of the deceased Rekha Kothari. He points out that
just before the accident and her resultant death, she had submitted her
income tax return for the assessment year 2007-08 showing an annual
income of Rs.4,05,071/-. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have taken this
figure as her annual income for the purpose of determining the compensation
for loss of dependency.
3.1 Apart from this, learned counsel for the appellants submits that no
addition has been made towards future prospects, although the Tribunal itself
recorded in para 24 of the impugned award that the deceased was 43 years of
age on the date of the accident.
3.2 He further submits that no amount has been awarded towards loss
of consortium, even though the claimants are the husband and two children
of the deceased. Accordingly, learned counsel prays for enhancement of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
3 MA-3247-2010
compensation in view of the aforesaid facts.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that
the Tribunal rightly discarded the income tax returns of the deceased for
valid reasons. He further submits that the reasoning of the Claims Tribunal is
not only proper but also based on cogent material. It is submitted that in
paras 21 to 23 of the impugned award, this aspect has been dealt with in
detail.
4.1 Learned counsel further submits that the income of the deceased
was shown under the heads of share brokerage, salary and tuition fee.
However, even after specific queries, the witnesses / claimants could not
inform where the deceased was employed or where she was engaged in
teaching to earn tuition fees. He also points out that Ex. P-11 which relates to
the educational qualifications of the deceased shows that she was a graduate
in Hindi Literature and Sociology and had no connection whatsoever with
Economics or Commerce. Thus, she in fact was not working as a share
broker. He also refers to the brokerage certificate Ex. P-13, issued by one
Sanjay C. Bakshi who appeared before the Tribunal.
4.1 On perusal of the said certificate and the agreement appended
thereto, it comes to the fore that it was merely a sub-brokerage agreement. In
the peculiar facts of the present case, considering the educational
qualifications of the deceased Rekha, it appears that her husband was
actually working in her name. Learned counsel points out that this aspect has
duly been considered by the Tribunal in para 23, wherein it is observed that
the appellant No.1, the husband of the deceased, is himself a Chartered
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
4 MA-3247-2010
Accountant who had arranged the transactions only for the purpose of
adjusting the TDS deducted by Sanjay C. Bakshi while issuing the sub-
brokerage certificate. He, therefore, submits that the Claims Tribunal rightly
discarded the income tax returns produced by the claimants to demonstrate
the income of late Rekha.
5. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the appellants submits that even if
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company are
accepted for the sake of argument, the presence of deducted TDS still
establishes that the income in question stood crystallised. He contends that
even if it is assumed that the income tax returns were filed only to adjust the
TDS at the instance of Sanjay C. Bakshi, such deduction itself indicates
actual income. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the
appellants has placed reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court
and this Court in the cases of Brijnandan Sharan Bansal and Others vs. Pepsu
Road Transport Corporation and Another in 2007 ACJ 692 , Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sumegha Sharma and Others in 2008 ACJ 2489 ,
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shalu Sharma and Others in I (2018)
ACC 714 (SC) and New Indian Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pramila and Others in
IV (2006) ACC 114 (DB) . He, therefore, prays for enhancement of
compensation by relying on the income tax returns submitted by the
appellants / claimants before the Claims Tribunal.
6. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the
record.
7. On perusal of the Exs. P-14 to P-16, which are the income tax
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
5 MA-3247-2010
returns for the years 2006-07 to 2008-09, it comes to the fore that for the last
assessment year i.e. 2008-09, the income of the deceased was shown at
Rs.4,05,071/-. However, a close scrutiny of the record and the findings
contained in paras 21 to 23 of the impugned award reveal that the deceased
was a graduate in Hindi Literature and Social Sciences, without any
background in commerce or other commercial activity. The claimants also
failed to demonstrate before the Claims Tribunal the name of the company
for which the deceased allegedly carried out share trading. Even the nature
and name of her employment or employer were not disclosed. It was further
not clarified where she was imparting education to earn tuition fees. There is
a complete absence of material to establish the nature of her employment or
to show any details of the alleged share trading and brokerage income.
8. It is not the law that in every case, income tax returns must be
accepted as they are, without applying judicial mind. Although the Hon'ble
Apex Court has, on several occasions, clarified that income tax returns are
the best source for determining the income of the deceased, in the peculiar
facts of the present case, and considering that the husband of the deceased is
himself a Chartered Accountant, this Court is of the considered view that the
Claims Tribunal has not committed any error of law in discarding the income
suggested by the income tax returns.
9. However, on perusal of the findings recorded in para 23, last part
regarding the income of the deceased being taken at Rs.3,000/- per month on
a notional basis appears to be very low in the peculiar facts of the present
case. The learned counsel for the appellants may have some substance in his
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
6 MA-3247-2010
arguments that TDS income was still there to be shown. As such, in the
peculiar facts of the present case, the income of the deceased is taken as
Rs.6,000/- per month.
10. As far as the question of addition in income for future prospects is
concerned, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017
ACJ 2700, considering the age of the deceased at 43 years (as noted in
paragraph 24 of the impugned award), an addition of 25% in the income of
the deceased is made towards future prospects.
11. The husband / appellant No.1 and appellants No.2 and 3 are the
children of the deceased. Hence, in view of the law laid down in the case of
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram reported in 2017 ACJ
2782 SC, all three of them are awarded Rs.40,000/- each, totalling
Rs.1,20,000/-.
12. The amounts awarded under the heads of funeral expenses and loss
of estate are hereby modified to Rs.15,000/- each, totalling Rs.30,000/-.
13. In view of the above additions and modifications in the income of
the deceased, the total compensation now comes to Rs.9,90,000/-. After
deducting the already awarded amount of Rs.3,46,000/- the appellants are
now entitled to payment of Rs.6,44,000/-.
14. This enhanced amount shall be paid to the appellants over and
above the amount already awarded by the Claims Tribunal with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before
the Claims Tribunal.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:32535
7 MA-3247-2010
15. With the aforesaid, the present Misc. Appeal stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Anushree
