Court May Adopt Higher Tier of Minimum Wages for Compensation Despite Unproved Salary Slips.

The appellant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on April 23, 2017, near Ghaziabad

The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), Karkardooma, awarded compensation of Rs. 11,03,144/- with 9% interest per annum via judgment dated May 23, 2018

The appellant filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation on two grounds: first, that his loss of income was incorrectly calculated based on minimum wages for an unskilled worker (Rs. 13,350/-) instead of his actual salary as a Manager (Rs. 20,800/-); and second, that attendant charges were under-calculated

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in calculating attendant charges at Rs. 50,000/- despite testimony indicating a higher expenditure

2. Whether the income of the claimant should be assessed based on the minimum wages of a skilled worker or actual claimed salary in the absence of formal proof from the employer

The Court applied the principles of compensatory justice under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

It specifically relied on the precedents established in Savita & Ors. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. (2026:DHC:3626), which provides "guideposts" for assessing income when documentary proof is lacking

The rule mandates that in the absence of formal proof of income in the informal sector, Courts should use minimum wage benchmarks of an appropriate category (unskilled, skilled, matriculate, etc.) as a yardstick rather than defaulting to the lowest tier

Regarding attendant charges, the Court found merit in the appellant's contention as the Tribunal recorded the testimony of the attendant (Ravi Ranjan Jha) who worked for five months at Rs. 15,000/- per month, yet the Tribunal only awarded a lump sum of Rs. 50,000/-. Consequently, the Court adjusted this to the actual proven amount of Rs. 75,000/-

Regarding income assessment, while the appellant failed to examine a representative from his employer to prove his salary slips of Rs. 20,800/-, his testimony remained "unshaken" during cross-examination.

Applying the Savita guidelines, the Court determined it was inappropriate to treat a Manager as an unskilled worker; therefore, it upgraded the benchmark to the minimum wage of a "skilled worker" (Rs. 16,468/-) for calculating the six-month loss of income

The total compensation was enhanced by Rs. 43,708/-, raising the total from Rs. 11,03,144/- to Rs. 11,46,852/-

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with 9% interest per annum from the date of filing the petition within six weeks

Recovery rights previously granted to the Insurance Company remained undisturbed as the driver and owner failed to appear