An owner may recover the IDV shortfall after deducting insurance and salvage proceeds.

Bharat’s truck was damaged in a collision with a truck owned by Shaju and insured by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Bharat claimed compensation for the damage.

His insurer paid him ₹6,68,000, and he received ₹5,50,000 from the sale of the damaged truck as scrap.

The Tribunal treated the truck’s insured declared value (IDV) of ₹16,50,000 as the total loss, deducted those two amounts, and awarded Bharat the balance of ₹4,32,000 with interest at 6% per annum.

The insurer appealed, arguing that the award was erroneous and, alternatively, that the compensation should be limited to ₹82,000 based on a survey report valuing the vehicle at ₹13,00,000.

The judgment contains inconsistent references to the accident date and time: the claim narrative refers to 29 January 2017 at 2:00 a.m., while other portions refer to 28 January 2017.

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive and warranted appellate interference

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Court applied the principle that compensation for vehicle damage should account for the claimant’s uncompensated pecuniary loss: it treated the vehicle’s IDV as the measure of total loss and deducted the amounts received from the claimant’s own insurer and from the sale of the damaged vehicle as scrap.

The Court noted that the truck’s IDV was ₹16,50,000, while Bharat had received ₹6,68,000 from his insurer and ₹5,50,000 as scrap value, totalling ₹12,18,000.

It concluded that the balance of ₹4,32,000 represented loss not compensated by those receipts and could be claimed from the owner and insurer of the other truck.

The Court therefore rejected the insurer’s challenge to the Tribunal’s award.

It dismissed the appeal and left in place the award of ₹4,32,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realisation; it also directed the Registry to transmit the trial court records to the Tribunal.