Compensation for a 26–30-year-old advocate must include 40% future prospects and multiplier 17.

On 28 June 1995, the deceased, Tulala Jayachander, aged approximately 29 years and practising as an advocate, was travelling on a scooter with a pillion rider near Gaddaragadi village on the Mandamarri–Mancherial Road. A lorry allegedly driven rashly and negligently on the wrong side of the road collided with the scooter, resulting in the instantaneous death of the deceased and the pillion rider.

The police registered a case under Section 304-A IPC and filed a charge-sheet against the lorry driver.

The deceased’s wife, child and parents filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs.8,00,000, asserting that he earned approximately Rs.8,000 per month as an advocate.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.4,47,000 with interest at 15% per annum. The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Act seeking enhancement.

The respondents did not challenge the Tribunal’s finding on negligence or liability.

Whether the appellants/claimants had established valid grounds for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and for consequential interference with the impugned order?

Whether the Tribunal had correctly assessed the deceased’s income, applied the appropriate multiplier, awarded compensation under conventional heads and fixed the rate of interest?

The Court applied Sections 166 and 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, governing claims for compensation arising from motor-vehicle accidents and appeals against awards.

Compensation for loss of dependency was assessed by determining the deceased’s income, deducting the appropriate share towards personal expenses, adding future prospects and applying the relevant multiplier.

Relying on Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298, the Court held that the appropriate multiplier for a deceased aged between 26 and 30 years is 17.

Under National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 ACJ 2700, a self-employed or professionally engaged person aged below 40 years was entitled to a 40% addition towards future prospects, together with compensation under conventional heads.

Under Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130, the child was entitled to parental consortium.

The Court also applied its consistent practice of awarding interest at 7.5% per annum in motor accident claim cases.

The finding that the accident resulted from the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver was supported by the testimony of the claimants’ witnesses and the FIR and charge-sheet, and remained unchallenged in appeal.

Although no authenticated income document was produced, the Court assessed the deceased’s monthly income at Rs.6,000, considering his profession as an advocate, the year of the accident and the documentary material relating to his professional and social activities.

Since there were four dependants, one-fourth was deducted towards personal expenses, resulting in a monthly contribution of Rs.4,500. Applying 40% future prospects, the monthly contribution became Rs.6,300, or Rs.75,600 annually. Applying the correct multiplier of 17 produced a loss-of-dependency figure of Rs.12,85,200.

The Court substituted the Tribunal’s unsupported amounts under conventional heads with Rs.77,000 for loss of estate, funeral expenses and spousal consortium, and awarded Rs.44,000 towards parental consortium to the minor child, including the applicable enhancement.

The total compensation was therefore recalculated at Rs.14,06,200. However, the Tribunal’s interest rate of 15% was reduced to 7.5% per annum as excessive.

The compensation was enhanced from Rs.4,47,000 to Rs.14,06,200, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.

The driver, owner and insurer were held jointly and severally liable to deposit the amount within two months of receiving the judgment.

The wife was awarded Rs.9,56,200, while the child and the deceased’s two parents were awarded Rs.1,50,000 each.

The claimants were permitted to withdraw their respective amounts, including accrued interest, without furnishing security.