Facts
The Insurance Company appealed against two awards dated March 6 and 7, 2026, passed by the MACT, Rohini Courts, which awarded compensation for the accidental deaths of Ved Prakash Pandey and Kuldeep Kumar Pandey on December 12, 2020
Source reference: p. 2, para 1In MAC.APP. 402/2026, the Tribunal awarded ₹39,13,100/- based on an estimated monthly income of ₹25,000/- for the deceased, Ved Prakash
Source reference: p. 2, para 2-3In MAC.APP. 403/2026, the Tribunal awarded ₹28,11,419/- based on a monthly income of ₹17,713.75/- for the deceased, Kuldeep Kumar
Source reference: p. 2 & 7The appellant challenged the income benchmarks, arguing a lack of credible documentary evidence to support the estimated earnings
Source reference: p. 2, para 4Issues
1. Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) erred in its estimation of the "benchmark income" of the deceased persons in the absence of absolute documentary proof of income
Source reference: p. 2-3, para 3 & 82. Whether the "guesswork" employed by the Tribunal to determine notional income was just and reasonable based on the available oral and documentary evidence
Source reference: p. 6, para 13Law Applied
The Court applied the principles of "just and reasonable compensation" under the Motor Vehicles Act and the guideposts for assessing benchmark income established in Savita & Ors. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. 2026:DHC:3626
Source reference: p. 3-5, para 9These principles allow for "intelligent guesswork" and "approximation" when assessing income in the informal sector or where documentary proof is incomplete, provided the assessment is based on the deceased's age, occupation, educational background, and testimonies of family members or employers
Source reference: p. 4-5, para 9Reasoning
The Court noted that for Ved Prakash Pandey, although witnesses PW5 and PW6 were not "fully robust," the claimants provided salary slips from Domino’s Pizza and an appointment letter from Pan HR Solution Pvt. Ltd.
Source reference: p. 3, para 6-8The deceased was also pursuing a B.A. and held an NCVT fitter certificate, indicating a high potential for earnings beyond basic minimum wages
Source reference: p. 6, para 11For Kuldeep Kumar Pandey, the income was calculated using actual testimonies from his employers at Jubilant Food Works and Machino Plastic Ltd.
Source reference: p. 7, para 2-3The Court reasoned that since there was no rebuttal evidence from the Insurance Company, the Tribunal was justified in using approximation to ensure "just" compensation, rather than adhering strictly to the lowest tier of minimum wages
Source reference: p. 6, para 13Holding
The Court held that the Tribunal’s estimation of income was neither arbitrary nor excessive given the deceased individuals’ educational backgrounds and multiple employment initiatives
The High Court dismissed both appeals and confirmed the MACT awards; the statutory deposits were ordered to be released back to the appellant, and all pending applications were disposed of
Source reference: p. 6-7Original Court PDF
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co LtdvsRam Vati & Ors.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in