Approaching superannuation does not preclude future-prospect additions in motor accident compensation.

Deenaben, an employee of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., died from injuries sustained when a tanker collided with the Activa on which she was travelling as a pillion rider.

Her husband and adopted son sought compensation, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹46,90,698 with interest at 9% per annum.

The insurer appealed, contending that the Tribunal had failed to deduct the proper income-tax amount from her salary and had wrongly added 15% for future prospects, given that she was 59 and approaching superannuation.

At the hearing, counsel for the claimants stated that the first claimant had died during the appeal and sought permission to delete him.

Whether the Tribunal should have deducted any further amount for income tax from Deenaben’s salary when calculating compensation.

Whether the Tribunal was justified in adding 15% to Deenaben’s income for future prospects despite her being 59 and approaching superannuation.

Under National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, future prospects form part of just compensation; for a person in permanent employment aged between 50 and 60, the addition is 15% of actual salary, with “actual salary” understood as salary less tax.

The decision also states that, for self-employed persons or those on fixed salaries aged between 50 and 60, the corresponding addition is 10% of established income after tax.

The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s discussion of these principles in V. Pathmavathi v. Bharthi Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd., reported at 2026 (0) AIR (SC) 840.

The judgment also referred generally to the Income Tax Act in considering the employer’s tax deductions.

The salary slip showed monthly income-tax deductions of ₹3,555 from Deenaben’s salary. As the claimants asserted no other income, the Court considered the employer’s deductions sufficient and rejected the insurer’s request for a further tax deduction.

Applying the Pranay Sethi rule, the Court held that a person’s approaching superannuation does not, by itself, preclude an award for future prospects.

Since Deenaben was 59 and in employment, the Tribunal’s 15% addition was consistent with the applicable rule for permanent employees aged 50 to 60.

It directed that any amount held by the Tribunal pursuant to the award be disbursed to the second original claimant after verification of his identity, and ordered that the record and proceedings be returned, if applicable.