Mother Injured, Daughter Killed: Karnataka HC Removes 25% Fault Deduction for Lack of Proof the Rider Contributed, Raises Awards

The claimant in MVC No. 7208/2018 was riding a scooter with her six-year-old daughter as pillion when it collided with a lorry on 18 August 2018.

The mother sustained multiple fractures; the child later died from her injuries.

The parents sought compensation in MVC No. 7209/2018 for the child’s death.

The Tribunal attributed 25% contributory negligence to the rider, in part because the accident occurred in the middle of the road and she did not produce a driving licence.

It awarded compensation in both claims, and the claimants appealed seeking enhanced compensation and removal of the negligence deduction.

Under the principle stated in Mohammed Siddique v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., a legal or traffic-rule violation does not, by itself, establish contributory negligence; a causal connection must be shown between the conduct and either the accident or the resulting injury.

For injury compensation, the Court applied the multiplier method in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation and used the KSLSA notional-income chart where actual income was unproved.

For a deceased child below 15, it applied the multiplier of 15 recognised in Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan, as affirmed in Pranay Sethi v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.

For the child’s income, the Court relied on Baby Sakshi Greola v. Manzoor Ahmad Simon and subsequent authority to use the applicable minimum wage for a skilled worker; it added future prospects and made a 50% deduction for personal expenses.

Consortium and conventional heads were assessed with reference to Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram and Pranay Sethi.

Although the spot sketch placed the accident 15 feet from the eastern edge of a 30-foot road, the police papers supported the claim that the lorry driver caused the collision, no charge-sheet was filed against the rider, and the insurer produced no eyewitness evidence of her negligence.

The absence of a driving licence did not establish that her conduct caused the accident or aggravated the injuries; the Tribunal’s 25% deduction was therefore set aside.

For the rider, the Court treated the doctor’s 42% limb disability as 14% whole-body disability, assessed monthly income at ₹12,500 and applied multiplier 18, alongside revised amounts under other heads.

For the child, it assessed monthly income at ₹11,733.20, added 40% for future prospects, deducted 50% for personal expenses and applied multiplier 15; it also retained the proved medical expenses and awarded amounts for consortium, estate, transportation and funeral expenses.

The Court modified the awards, holding that the injured claimant was entitled to ₹6,83,792 and the parents of the deceased child to ₹19,65,626.

The enhanced compensation carries interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization, excluding the period of delay; deposit was directed within six weeks, with apportionment and disbursement as ordered by the Tribunal.