P&H HC Adds ₹48,400 Consortium For Each Of Crash Victim’s 3 Dependants, Raising Compensation To ₹1.20 Crore

Aayush died in a motor-vehicle accident on 31 August 2023 when the car he was driving was struck by a car driven by Gopal and then collided with a canter.

His father, wife and minor son sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found Gopal negligent and awarded ₹1,19,24,000 with interest at 7.5% per annum, holding the driver, owner and insurer jointly and severally liable.

The claimants appealed for enhancement; United India Insurance Company challenged the finding on negligence, alleging that the eyewitness was planted, and contended that the award was excessive.

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides the basis for a claim for compensation arising from a motor-vehicle accident.

Under National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, future prospects, the multiplier, deductions for personal expenses and conventional heads are assessed according to the prescribed principles; conventional amounts are increased by 10% every three years.

Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corp., as approved in Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan, guides deductions for personal and living expenses according to the number of dependants.

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur recognise spousal, parental and filial consortium, and clarify that loss of love and affection is not a separate compensable head.

The eyewitness’s account was consistent with the FIR, and the fact that he was following the deceased’s car from a distance of half a kilometre did not make it impossible for him to witness the collision; at 50 km/h, he would cover that distance in about 36 seconds.

On quantum, the Court upheld the Tribunal’s assessment of income from Aayush’s income-tax returns, the 40% addition for future prospects, multiplier of 16 and one-third deduction for personal expenses.

It found, however, that the conventional amounts required adjustment under Pranay Sethi: loss of estate and funeral expenses were increased to ₹18,150 each, and consortium was set at ₹48,400 for each of the three claimants, totalling ₹1,45,200.

The Court disposed of both appeals and modified the award by increasing the total compensation to ₹1,20,28,700.

The claimants were awarded the differential sum of ₹1,04,700, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition until realization.

payment was directed within six weeks.