For multiplier purposes, completed age governs; a deceased below 41 years attracts multiplier 15.

The appellants, being the widow, minor children, and parents of Late Rakesh Kumar Paikra, filed an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded for his death in a motor accident involving Truck No. UP-83-AT-9286. The Claims Tribunal, in Claim Case No. 109/2022, awarded compensation of ₹85,04,709 by its award dated 20 February 2024.

The Tribunal assessed the deceased’s monthly income at ₹84,072 based on the income-tax record, added 30% towards future prospects, deducted one-fourth towards personal expenses, and applied a multiplier of 13. The appellants challenged principally the application of multiplier 13, contending that the deceased, born on 5 January 1982, was aged 40 years, 4 months and 26 days on the date of death and had not completed 41 years.

Whether the Tribunal erred in applying a multiplier of 13 instead of the multiplier applicable to a deceased who had completed 40 years but not 41 years of age?

Whether the compensation under the conventional heads was inadequate and required enhancement in accordance with prevailing legal principles?

Whether the deduction towards income tax was correctly computed while determining the deceased’s annual loss of dependency?

The Court applied Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, governing appeals against awards of Claims Tribunals.

Under Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, the appropriate multiplier for a deceased aged between 36 and 40 years is 15, while the age is determined by completed years.

Relying on Shashikala v. Gangalakshmamma, (2015) 9 SCC 150, the Court held that a person who has not completed the next year of age must be treated according to the completed age.

Under Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, a salaried deceased aged 40 years is entitled to 30% addition towards future prospects. The Court also relied on Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130, concerning consortium payable to eligible dependants.

The Court accepted the deceased’s date of birth as 5 January 1982 and determined that he was 40 years, 4 months and 26 days old at the relevant time; therefore, he had not completed 41 years and fell within the 36–40 age bracket for multiplier purposes.

Applying Sarla Verma and Shashikala, the Court held that multiplier 15, rather than 13, was applicable.

It affirmed the monthly income of ₹84,072, added 30% future prospects, and arrived at an annual income of ₹13,11,523. It then recalculated income tax for the financial year 2022–23 at ₹2,14,195, leaving a post-tax annual income of ₹10,97,328.

After deducting one-fourth for personal expenses, the annual dependency was assessed at ₹8,22,996, which, multiplied by 15, resulted in ₹1,23,44,940 towards loss of dependency. The Court further enhanced the conventional heads to ₹2,53,000, comprising loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium for five dependants.

The remaining conditions of the Tribunal’s award were maintained, and the Registry was directed to communicate the enhanced amount to the claimants in Hindi, with assistance from paralegal workers where necessary.