The deceased’s contributory negligence was reduced to 30%, assigning 70% liability to the lorry driver.

The claimants, the parents and sister of the deceased Karthick, sought compensation after he died in a collision between the vehicle he was driving and a lorry on 28 December 2019.

The Tribunal found both drivers negligent, attributing 50% contributory negligence to the deceased, and awarded ₹9,42,200 after applying that reduction to a total assessment of ₹18,84,400.

It assessed the deceased’s monthly income at ₹12,000, added 40% for future prospects, and applied a multiplier of 18.

The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking a reduction in the deceased’s share of negligence and enhancement of compensation.

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in attributing 50% contributory negligence to the deceased, and whether that apportionment should be modified

2. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income and the resulting compensation required enhancement

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

In assessing compensation, the Court applied National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, which supports adding future prospects to income, and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, which guided selection of the multiplier by the deceased’s age.

The Court also applied the principle of contributory negligence by apportioning responsibility between the deceased and the lorry driver according to their respective negligence.

The FIR and rough sketch indicated that the deceased’s vehicle struck the lorry from behind, while the lorry’s rear-right indicator and bumper were damaged.

The Court considered that the lorry driver should not have turned suddenly, but that the deceased should have maintained a safe distance; it therefore reduced the deceased’s share of negligence from 50% to 30% and attributed 70% to the lorry driver.

On quantum, the Court held that ₹12,000 per month was inadequate for a 25-year-old working as a driver in 2019, despite the absence of proof supporting the claimed ₹25,000 income.

It fixed monthly income at ₹15,000, added 40% future prospects, deducted half for personal expenses, and applied a multiplier of 18, producing loss of dependency of ₹22,68,000.

It also awarded the deceased’s sister ₹40,000 for loss of love and affection, while leaving the other conventional heads undisturbed.

The Court increased the total compensation to ₹23,78,000 and, after deducting 30% for the deceased’s contributory negligence, fixed the payable compensation at ₹16,64,600.

The insurer of the lorry was directed to deposit that amount, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the claim-petition filing date until deposit, less any amount already deposited.

The claimants were not entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the 362-day delay period previously excluded by the Court; the Tribunal’s apportionment and other disbursement directions remained in force.