Facts
On 14 September 2004, Marukhusen Mohma Idris Ansari was fatally injured when a jeep collided with his scooter on the Ambaji–Khedbrahma Highway
Source reference: p.2, para. 2His legal representatives filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Source reference: pp.2–3, paras. 2.2, 2.4The Tribunal awarded Rs.16,92,700 with interest at 9% per annum
Source reference: pp.2–3, paras. 2.2, 2.4The Insurance Company appealed, challenging the multiplier of 15; the claimants cross-objected, seeking enhancement for future prospects and under conventional heads
Source reference: pp.3–4, paras. 4–5Issues
Whether the Tribunal erred in applying a multiplier of 15 instead of 14, having regard to the deceased’s age
Source reference: pp.3–4, paras. 4, 8Whether the compensation should be enhanced by adding future prospects and revising the amounts awarded under conventional heads
Source reference: pp.4–5, paras. 5, 9–10Law Applied
In claims under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the multiplier is to be selected by reference to the standardized table in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, as reiterated in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi; the multiplier in the Second Schedule, framed primarily for structured compensation under Section 163A, does not govern a Section 166 claim
Source reference: p.4, para. 7Pranay Sethi also governs the addition for future prospects and compensation under conventional heads.
Source reference: p.5, para. 10The deduction for personal and living expenses is determined according to the settled principles applicable to the number of dependants.
Source reference: p.5, para. 10Reasoning
The Court accepted that the deceased was aged between 42 and 45, and the claimants’ counsel conceded that multiplier 14, rather than 15, was applicable
Source reference: p.4, para. 8It left undisturbed the Tribunal’s assessment of monthly income at Rs.11,118 based on the deceased’s BSNL salary slip, but found that future prospects had not been included; given his age and permanent employment, it added 30%
Source reference: p.5, paras. 9–10The Court also revised conventional compensation, awarding consortium to the widow and each of the four children, and amounts for loss of estate and funeral expenses
Source reference: p.5, para. 10It assessed total compensation at Rs.20,99,400, including future dependency loss of Rs.18,21,078
Source reference: p.6, para. 11Holding
The Insurance Company’s appeal and the claimants’ cross-objection were both allowed to the stated extent.
The Court awarded an enhanced Rs.4,06,700, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition until realization, and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the enhanced amount with accrued interest within 12 weeks
Source reference: pp.6–7, paras. 12–16The Tribunal was directed to disburse the amounts after verification and to deduct any unpaid court fees in accordance with law
Source reference: p.7, paras. 14–15Acts & Sections Cited
2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Motor Vehicles Act, 19882
Original Court PDF
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDvsMASIHANKHATUN WD/O MARUKHUSEN MHOMAD IDRIS ANSARI
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
