Motor accident multipliers are determined by completed age, not the next year of age.

The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded for the death of Thaneshwar Prasad Verma in a road accident on 30 April 2022.

The Claims Tribunal awarded ₹28,52,192, applying a multiplier of 7.

The claimants argued that the deceased, aged 60 years, 5 months and 15 days, had not completed 61 years and that the appropriate multiplier was 9; they also challenged the amount awarded under conventional heads.

The insurer submitted that income tax should have been deducted from the deceased’s salary income.

Whether the Tribunal applied the correct multiplier, having regard to the deceased’s age at the time of the accident.

Whether income tax should be deducted from the deceased’s annual income when calculating compensation.

Whether the compensation awarded under conventional heads required enhancement.

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

Under Sarla Verma & Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another, the applicable multiplier is determined by the deceased’s age, and the multiplier for the 56–60 age bracket is 9.

Shashikala & Others v. Gangalakshmamma & Another establishes that completed years of age are to be considered when selecting the multiplier.

The Court also relied on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi concerning future prospects and conventional heads, and on Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram concerning consortium.

The Court treated income tax payable on the deceased’s salary as a deduction from annual income before calculating loss of dependency.

The deceased’s date of birth and date of death established that he had completed 60, but not 61, years; applying the completed-years principle, the Court held that the multiplier was 9 rather than 7.

It accepted the Tribunal’s monthly income of ₹49,557 and its deduction of one-third for personal expenses, but deducted ₹32,694 in income tax from the annual income of ₹5,94,684, leaving ₹5,61,990 for the dependency calculation.

Applying the one-third deduction and multiplier of 9 produced a dependency award of ₹33,71,940.

The Court also increased the conventional-heads award to ₹2,09,000, comprising loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium.

It awarded the claimants an additional ₹7,28,748, carrying interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim application until realization.

The remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left unchanged, and the Registry was directed to communicate the enhanced amount to the claimants in Hindi.