Gujarat High Court
Transport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Section 166 claims require the standardized multiplier, not the Second Schedule multiplier.

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD vs MASIHANKHATUN WD/O MARUKHUSEN MHOMAD IDRIS ANSARI

Gujarat High CourtJUDGMENT: September 23, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Section 166 claims require the standardized multiplier, not the Second Schedule multiplier.. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD vs MASIHANKHATUN WD/O MARUKHUSEN MHOMAD IDRIS ANSARI. Gujarat High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

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. 2

His legal representatives filed a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Source reference: pp.2–3, paras. 2.2, 2.4

The Tribunal awarded Rs.16,92,700 with interest at 9% per annum

Source reference: pp.2–3, paras. 2.2, 2.4

The 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. 4–5
02

Issues

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, 8

Whether the compensation should be enhanced by adding future prospects and revising the amounts awarded under conventional heads

Source reference: pp.4–5, paras. 5, 9–10
03

Law 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. 7

Pranay Sethi also governs the addition for future prospects and compensation under conventional heads.

Source reference: p.5, para. 10

The deduction for personal and living expenses is determined according to the settled principles applicable to the number of dependants.

Source reference: p.5, para. 10
04

Reasoning

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. 8

It 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. 9–10

The 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. 10

It assessed total compensation at Rs.20,99,400, including future dependency loss of Rs.18,21,078

Source reference: p.6, para. 11
05

Holding

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. 12–16

The 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. 14–15
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19882

Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDvsMASIHANKHATUN WD/O MARUKHUSEN MHOMAD IDRIS ANSARI

Gujarat High Court · September 23, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment