Motor accident compensation must reflect notified minimum wages and properly assessed conventional heads.

Gopal Ram, aged about 56, died in a road accident on 8 February 2023.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, awarded his dependants Rs. 6,24,400 in compensation, assessing his monthly income at Rs. 7,000 and awarding Rs. 70,000 under conventional heads.

His widow and children appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement on the grounds that the income assessment and conventional-head amounts were too low.

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income at Rs. 7,000 per month should be revised to Rs. 9,960 in calculating compensation.

Whether the compensation under conventional heads should be enhanced, and what total compensation was just and proper.

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal.

In calculating compensation, the Court relied on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors., and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors. for the applicable principles concerning future prospects, personal-expense deductions, multiplier, and conventional heads.

The Court used a 10% addition for future prospects, a one-third deduction, and a multiplier of nine in its computation.

The Court found the Tribunal’s monthly-income assessment understated because the Chhattisgarh minimum-wage notification supported an income of Rs. 9,960.

Applying a 10% addition for future prospects, deducting one-third for personal expenses, and applying a multiplier of nine, it calculated the loss-of-dependency component at Rs. 7,88,832.

It also increased the amount under conventional heads from Rs. 70,000 to Rs. 1,80,000, producing total compensation of Rs. 9,68,832.

The appellants were held entitled to an additional Rs. 3,44,432, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until realization; the remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left unchanged.

The Registry was directed to communicate the enhanced amount to the claimants in Hindi.