NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. SMT. SHANTI PATHAK AND ORS

Citation: [2007] 8 S.C.R. 237

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT, P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, D.K. JAIN

Case summary

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. SMT. SHANTI PATHAK AND ORS.pdf

Judgment text

r - ). --- NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. . , v. I SMT. SHANTI PATHAK AND ORS. JULY I0, 2007 [DR. ARJJIT PASAYAT, P. K. BALASUBRAMANYAN AND D. K. JAIN, JJ. ] ~- _... _ Motor Vehicles Act, J988-Motor accident-Death-Compensation- Jn one case age ofdeceased was 25 years-Jn another case age ofdeceased 52 years-Tribunal awarding compensation-By applying multiplier of 17 in case of 25 years old deceased-By applying multiplier of J3 in case of 25 years old deceased-Propriety ofapplication ofmultiplier-Held: In case of 25 years old deceased multiplier altered to 5 in view ofthe advance age of the claimants-In case of 52 years old deceased multiplier altered to 8 ~n view of age of deceased-Compensations altered accordingly. ' . , In a case of motor accident, where the age ofdeceased was 25 years and ~ age of the claimant was 65 years and more at the time of accident, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal awarded compensation applying multiplier of 17 in view ofage of the deceased.

In another case where the age of the deceased was 52 years, Tribunal E. awarded compensation applying multiplier of 13. The appeals by appellantinsurer were dismissed by High Court. Hence the present appeals. Partly allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: I. Considering the income that was taken, the foundation for working out the compensation cannot be faulted. Considering the fact that the matter is pending since long, it would be appropriate not to remit the case back to High Court and to take the multiplier of5 considering the fact that the mother of the deceased is about 65 years atthe time of the accident and age of the father is more than 65 years. Taking into account the monthly contribution at Rs. 3,500/- as held by the Tribunal and the High Court, the ... entitlement of the claim would be Rs. 2,10,000/-. The same shall bear interest @ 7. 5% p. a. from the date of the application for compensation. Payment already made shall be adjusted from the amount due. !

Para 711239-E, F, GI ---.. .... WITH C. A. No. 2928 of2007. S. L. Gupta, 8. K. Sharma and Goodwill Indeevar for the Appellant. G. E. Vahanvati, SG. , Binu Tamta, 8. K. Prasad, P. N. Puri, Kuldlp Singh, R. K. Pandey, Sanjay Katyal, T. P. Mishra and Debasis Misra for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by __. DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. C. ANOS. 2926-2927/07 @SLP ©Nos. 20101~ 02/05. . I. Leave granted. .. 2. Challenge in this appeals is to the legality of the judgment rendered • by a Division Bench of Uttranchal High Court dismissing the appeal filed before I~ under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the 'Act'). ~ The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Addi. Distrfot Judge, F. T. C. Nainital (hereinafter referred to as the 'tribunal') awarded a sum of Rs. 4, 10,000/- in NEWINDIAASSURANCECOMPANYLTD. v. SHANTIPATHAK[PASAYAT,J. ] 239 favor of the respondents l and 2 (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimants'). 3.

The background facts which are almost undisputed essentially are as follows: 4. On 11. 11. 2002 Hem Pathak (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') who was at the relevant point oftirrie 25 years ofage lost his life in a vehicular accident. He was traveling in Jeep No. UP 03/0805. The said jeep had a collision with truck bearing No. UP 20A-849 I. Since the truck was the subject matter of insurance, the parents of the deceased filed a Claim Petition. The Tribunal as noted above awarded Rs. 4,10,000/-. Since the age of the deceased was 25 years, multiplier of 17 was applied. The Tribunal referred to various decisions of this Court for quantifying the amount as Rs. 4, l0,000/-. 5. Before the High Court. it was contended by the appellant that the multiplier to be adopted is to be :detennined on the age of the claimants and not on the age of the deceased, which was to be taken as the basis for. working out the compensation. The High Court did not find any substance. , in this plea.

It was held that no pennission had been granted to the insurer to contest its claim. It was submittl! d that it is a clear case of contributory negligence and the quantum ofcompensation should be suitably divided. The High Court did not find any substance in this plea also. 6. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that both the trial Court and the High Court failed to notice the age of the.. claima! }ts which was relevant and not the age of the deceased. 7. Considering the income that was taken, the foundation for wo! king . · out the compensation cannot be faulted. The monthly contribution was-:fjxed at Rs. 3,500/-. In the normal ~ourse we would have remitted the matte~ io_the High Court for consideration on the materials placed before it. But considering the fact that the matter is pending since long, it would be appropriate-~Q tiike the multiplier of 5 considering the fact that the mother of the deceased'.

is about 65 years at the time of the accident and age of the father is more than 65 years. Taking into account the monthly contribution at Rs. 3,500/- as held by the Tribunal and the High Court, the entitlement ofthe claim '*otild be. Rs. 2, 10,000/-. The same shall bear interest@ 7. 5% p~a. from. the 'date: ~fthe __,), application for compensation: Payment already . made shall be adjusted from · the amount due. . · . · . · . · 8. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. ' --<:- Civil Appeal No. 2928/07@ SLP © No. 3957/06 - 9. In the instant case the age of the deceased was 52 years as per the post mortem report, and the multiplier thus has to be 8 instead of 13 as adopted by the Tribunal and upheld by the High Court. The rate of interest awarded does not need any interference. The monthly income has to be taken as Rs. 11,684/- and one-third has to be deducted therefrom for personal expenses. Thus, the annual loss of income comes to Rs. 93,939/-.

The same is =rounded to Rs. 93,000/-. The entitlement for loss of income comes to Rs. 7,44,000/-. The other amounts awarded by the Tribunal totaling Rs. 29,500/ - remain unaltered. Thus the claimant is entitled to Rs. 7,73,500 alongwith interest at the rate fixed by the Tribunal. The payment already made shall be adjusted. I The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to . • I costs. K. K. T. Appea'ts partly allowed. . f J . I . I i I t- ··. t= rk~ ' t( ,. __ ~- If--: