Notional income of a 55-year-old deceased fixed at ₹19,500 monthly, with 10% future prospects.

The appellants, the deceased’s wife and minor daughter, sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for his death in a road accident on 21 April 2022.

The Tribunal found the lorry driver solely negligent and awarded ₹16,69,800.

The claimants appealed under Section 173, seeking enhancement, principally contending that the deceased’s income had been assessed too low.

The High Court considered the deceased’s age, the evidence concerning income, and the Tribunal’s award.

1. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income and resulting compensation for loss of dependency required enhancement.

2. Whether the compensation awarded under the other heads required interference.

Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the High Court may review an award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in an appeal seeking enhancement.

In assessing compensation for loss of dependency, National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi provides for the addition of future prospects, while Sarla Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation guides the selection of the multiplier and deduction for personal expenses.

The Court applied a 10% addition for future prospects, a one-third deduction for personal expenses, and a multiplier of 11 for a deceased aged 55.

The Court accepted that the Tribunal’s income assessment did not adequately reflect the circumstances at the time of the accident and fixed the deceased’s monthly notional income at ₹19,500.

Applying the cited principles, it added 10% for future prospects, deducted one-third for personal expenses, and applied a multiplier of 11, calculating loss of dependency at ₹18,87,600.

It found no reason to alter the Tribunal’s awards for loss of estate, consortium, or funeral expenses.

The total compensation was enhanced from ₹16,69,800 to ₹20,08,600, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition until deposit, except for any period of default.

The insurer was directed to deposit the amount due, less any sum already deposited, within six weeks; the claimants may withdraw their apportioned shares in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions.