Facts
The appellants (legal representatives of the deceased, Mohhamad Ibraan Ahmed) filed a claim for compensation following a motor vehicle accident on 20.01.2021
Source reference: p. 2The deceased was a carpenter, and the claimants alleged he earned Rs. 24,000/- per month
Source reference: p. 2The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Manendragarh, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 9,77,200/-, assessing the deceased's monthly income at only Rs. 6,000/-
Source reference: p. 2-3The Tribunal rejected the salary evidence provided by a witness (AW-3) from C.V. Quality Furniture, noting discrepancies in the witness's employment period and the records produced
Source reference: para. 7The appellants challenged this award, seeking an enhancement of the compensation based on a higher income assessment
Source reference: p. 3Issues
1. Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- given his profession as a carpenter
Source reference: p. 32. Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation under the heads of future prospects and various consortiums in accordance with established judicial precedents
Source reference: p. 4Law Applied
The Court applied the principles for calculating "just compensation" as established by the Supreme Court of India in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) regarding the selection of multipliers and deduction for personal expenses
Source reference: p. 3-4It further relied on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) for the standardization of "future prospects" (40% for deceased below 40 years) and conventional heads
Source reference: p. 4Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) regarding the award of filial consortium to the dependents
Source reference: p. 4Reasoning
The Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision to discount the specific salary certificate of Rs. 24,000/-, noting that witness AW-3 had left the employment before the documents were produced and the records were doubtful
Source reference: para. 7the Court found the Tribunal’s assessment of Rs. 6,000/- per month to be "on the lower side" considering the nature of the deceased's job as a carpenter, the number of dependents, and the prevailing minimum wages
Source reference: para. 7Consequently, the Court re-assessed the monthly income at Rs. 10,000/-
Source reference: para. 7Applying the law, the Court added 40% for future prospects (Rs. 4,000), deducted 1/3 for personal expenses (though the calculation table suggests a 1/2 deduction was applied for reasons not explicitly detailed, likely due to the number of claimants), and applied a multiplier of 18
Source reference: p. 4Holding
The High Court partly allowed the appeal, answering that the income assessment required upward revision to reflect the deceased's skilled trade
The Court enhanced the total compensation from Rs. 9,77,200/- to Rs. 15,85,000/-
Source reference: p. 4It ordered the Insurance Company to pay the additional amount of Rs. 6,07,800/- with 6% interest per annum from 28.03.2023
Source reference: para. 8Specific directions were issued for the fixed deposit of portions of the award in the names of the appellants to ensure financial security
Source reference: para. 9Original Court PDF
RIZWAN AHMADvsBASANT YADAV
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in