Absent concrete income evidence, minimum wages must guide motor accident compensation assessment.

The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dahod’s award dated 31 August 2016 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 122 of 2009.

They sought enhancement, contending that the Tribunal had not properly assessed compensation.

The insurer defended the award.

The High Court noted that the accident-related facts and liability were not disputed; the appeal concerned the amount of compensation

Whether the Tribunal had properly assessed the deceased’s income and the resulting loss of dependency

Whether the compensation under the conventional heads required enhancement

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against a Tribunal’s award

Compensation under the Act must be just and fair, assessed on a reasonable and realistic basis, and should not be niggardly

In National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the Supreme Court set the applicable amounts for loss of estate and funeral expenses; the High Court applied amounts of Rs. 19,965 for each head

Under United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur, (2021) 11 SCC 780, it applied consortium of Rs. 53,240 for each dependent

Relying on Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari, 2025 (4) GLH 470, the Court stated that minimum wages should be used to assess income where concrete evidence of the deceased’s income is absent

The Court found that the Tribunal had not properly considered the deceased’s monthly income and applied the minimum-wage approach in the absence of concrete income evidence

It recalculated future dependency loss at Rs. 4,53,600 and conventional compensation at Rs. 1,46,410, for total compensation of Rs. 6,00,010. After deducting the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 2,89,936, it determined that an additional Rs. 3,10,074 was payable

The claimants were awarded an additional Rs. 3,10,074, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until realisation.

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount and interest within eight weeks; the Tribunal’s remaining directions were left unchanged

The Tribunal was directed to disburse the amount in accordance with the prescribed procedure and to deduct any unpaid court fees as required by law