In absence of income evidence, motor accident compensation must apply skilled minimum wages and 40% future prospects.

On 30 August 2006, Thakorbhai Fatesinh Chaudhary was riding motorcycle No. GJ-04-J-8496 near Bharti Hotel, Village Bajipura, when truck No. GJ-11-X-9020 collided with his motorcycle. He sustained serious injuries and died as a result of the accident.

His widow, four minor children and aged mother filed MACP No. 69 of 2007 before the MACT, Vyara. The vehicle owner and driver did not appear, while the insurer contested the claim.

The Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded ₹3,77,024 with interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing until realization.

The claimants appealed, seeking enhancement on the grounds that the deceased’s income, future prospects and compensation under conventional heads had been assessed inadequately.

Whether the deceased’s monthly income should have been assessed with reference to the minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker rather than at ₹2,400 per month?

Whether 40% of the income was required to be added towards future prospects, considering the deceased’s age of approximately 32 years?

Whether the claimants were entitled to enhanced compensation for loss of dependency, loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses?

What enhanced compensation, interest and consequential directions should be granted?

The Court applied the principles governing computation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including assessment of notional income where actual income is not proved, deduction for personal expenses, and application of the appropriate multiplier.

In the absence of cogent evidence of income, the Court held that the minimum wages for a skilled worker prevailing in 2006—₹2,500 per month—should be adopted.

Relying on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, it applied a 40% addition towards future prospects for a deceased aged about 32 years and enhanced the amounts under loss of estate and funeral expenses to ₹18,150 each.

Relying on Magma General Insurance Co. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., AIRONLINE 2018 SC 189, it awarded consortium to each of the six legal representatives, at ₹48,400 per claimant.

The Court found that the Tribunal’s assessment of ₹2,400 per month was below the applicable minimum wage for a skilled worker and therefore substituted ₹2,500 as the deceased’s monthly income.

Since the deceased was approximately 32 years old, 40% was added towards future prospects, resulting in a monthly income of ₹3,500.

As six legal representatives survived him, one-fourth was deducted towards personal expenses, leaving ₹2,625 per month as the multiplicand for dependency.

Applying a multiplier of 16, the loss of dependency was calculated at ₹5,04,000.

The Court further held that the widow, four children and mother were each entitled to consortium, totalling ₹2,90,400, and enhanced the amounts for loss of estate and funeral expenses to ₹18,150 each in accordance with the governing precedents.

The total compensation was consequently recalculated at ₹8,30,700, against the Tribunal’s award of ₹3,77,024.

The total compensation was enhanced to ₹8,30,700, resulting in an additional award of ₹4,53,676 over and above the amount granted by the Tribunal.

The claimants were held entitled to interest from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.

Although paragraph 6.1 refers to continuation of interest at 8% per annum, the operative direction in paragraph 7 directs the insurer to deposit the additional compensation with interest at 9% per annum within six weeks.

The impugned judgment and award was modified accordingly, and the appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.