Facts
On August 6, 2014, Sonu Verma @ Sonu Singh was riding a motorcycle when he was struck by a truck bearing registration No. HR-55Q-1000, resulting in his death
Source reference: p. 1The deceased’s family filed a claim petition.
Source reference: p. 1By an award dated July 2, 2018, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) granted compensation of Rs. 17,50,000/- with 9% interest
Source reference: p. 1In calculating the award, the MACT used the minimum wages for a non-graduate in Uttar Pradesh (Rs. 7,840/- per month) as the income benchmark
Source reference: p. 2The Appellants/claimants sought enhancement, contending the deceased was actually earning Rs. 21,000/- per month at a Delhi-based firm, M/s Perfect Marketing Solutions Pvt. Ltd., supported by witness testimony and employment records (Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D)
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the income of the deceased should be assessed based on the minimum wages of a skilled worker in Delhi rather than the minimum wages of a non-graduate in Uttar Pradesh
Source reference: p. 32. Whether the compensation for loss of consortium should be extended to all five dependents of the deceased
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
The Court primarily applied the principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680, which mandates the inclusion of future prospects (40% for deceased individuals below 40 years) and the awarding of loss of consortium to all legal dependents—spouse, children, and parents
Source reference: p. 3The Court also followed the principle that where employment is established but exact salary documentation is partially deficient, the minimum wages of a "skilled worker" in the relevant jurisdiction (Delhi) should serve as the evidentiary floor for income assessment
Source reference: p. 3Reasoning
The Court observed that the testimony of the deceased’s wife and the employer’s representative (PW4) aligned to establish that the deceased was indeed employed by a Delhi-based entity
Source reference: p. 3Although the Insurance Company challenged the lack of signatures on attendance registers and serial numbers in cash books, the Court found the evidence sufficient to prove employment in some capacity.
Source reference: p. 3Consequently, the Court held that the MACT erred in applying Uttar Pradesh wage rates; instead, the minimum wages for a skilled worker in Delhi (Rs. 10,478/-) at the time of the accident were applicable
Source reference: p. 3Regarding non-pecuniary damages, the Court noted that the MACT only awarded a total of Rs. 40,000/- for consortium.
Source reference: p. 3Adhering to the Pranay Sethi mandate, the Court determined that all five claimants (wife, two children, and both parents) were entitled to Rs. 40,000/- each, totaling Rs. 2,00,000/-
Source reference: p. 3Holding
The Court allowed the appeal and enhanced the total compensation from Rs. 17,50,000/- to Rs. 24,74,510/-, representing an increase of Rs. 7,24,510/-
The Court directed the Insurance Company to deposit the enhanced amount with 9% interest per annum within four weeks
Source reference: p. 4It further ordered that Rs. 3,00,000/- be released immediately to the claimants, with the remaining balance to be maintained in staggered Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) of Rs. 25,000/- each to ensure long-term financial security
Source reference: p. 4-5Original Court PDF
Kavita Verma & OrsvsSonu & Ors (Magma Hdi General Insurance Co Ltd)
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in