Employer Testimony and Salary Certificate Sufficient to Establish Income for Motor Accident Compensation Claims

On January 5, 2020, Uttam Oraon was struck and fatally injured by a rashly driven NBSTC Bus (WB-63A/5784) on NH-34

The deceased was 34 years old and allegedly earned Rs. 9,000/- per month working at a rice mill

The Appellants (mother and minor son) filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

The Tribunal awarded Rs. 11,45,200/- plus 6% interest, assessing compensation based on a lower income bracket rather than the claimed salary

The Appellants approached the High Court seeking enhancement, contending that the salary certificate and testimony of the employer (P.W. 3) proved the victim's monthly income of Rs. 9,000/-

1. Whether the Learned Tribunal erred in failing to consider the victim’s monthly income as Rs. 9,000/- despite the evidence of the employer and the salary certificate

2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Trial Court was "just and reasonable" under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act

The court applied Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, concerning compensation for motor accidents

The court relied on the principle that where an employer deposes in court and produces a salary certificate that inspires confidence, that actual income must be the basis for calculation rather than national/notional income; thus, it distinguished the precedent in Manusha Sree Kumar and ors. vs. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

The court utilized the standard multiplier method (applying a multiplier of 16 for a 34-year-old) and standard deductions for personal expenses (1/3rd) and future prospects (40%) as established in Sarla Verma and Pranay Sethi

The Court observed that while the nature of the victim's work was not explicitly detailed in the salary certificate, the testimony of P.W. 3 (the rice mill owner) and P.W. 1 (mother) established his employment

Crucially, the employer appeared before the court and confirmed the salary of Rs. 9,000/- per month, noting additional payments for overtime

The Court found this evidence credible, concluding that shifting to "national income" was unnecessary when specific proof of earnings existed

By accepting the monthly income of Rs. 9,000/- and adding 40% for future prospects (totaling Rs. 12,600/-), then deducting 1/3rd for personal expenses, the net monthly loss was determined at Rs. 8,400/-

Applying a multiplier of 16 and adding statutory heads (consortium, funeral expenses, medical costs, and loss of estate), the Court recalculated the figure to be approximately Rs. 17.72 lakhs

The High Court directed the Insurance Company to deposit the balance amount (after adjusting any amounts already paid) with 6% interest from the date of filing the claim before the Registrar General within 8 weeks

The minor claimant’s share must be invested in a fixed deposit until maturity