Facts
On 28 December 2019, the deceased was struck by a Mahindra Bolero Pick-up while standing by the roadside and died after being taken to hospital
Source reference: para. 3His dependants sought compensation, and the Tribunal awarded ₹32,44,000 with interest at 8% per annum
Source reference: paras. 3, 7The insurer appealed, challenging the compensation—including the deduction for the deceased’s personal expenses and amounts awarded under conventional heads—and the interest rate
Source reference: para. 9Issues
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive and required reduction
Source reference: para. 12(i)Whether the Tribunal’s award of interest at 8% per annum required modification
Source reference: paras. 9, 22Law Applied
Under National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, conventional amounts for loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses are subject to 10% escalation as applied by the Court
Source reference: paras. 15–16In calculating loss of dependency, the Court applied a 40% addition for future prospects, a one-fourth deduction for personal and living expenses where the deceased left five dependants, and a multiplier of 16 in this case
Source reference: paras. 17–18The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The Court reassessed the dependency award using a monthly notional income of ₹13,250, adding 40% for future prospects, deducting one-fourth for personal expenses, and applying multiplier 16, which yielded ₹26,71,200
Source reference: paras. 17–19It fixed consortium at ₹2,20,000 for the widow, three children, and the deceased’s mother, and allowed ₹16,500 each for loss of estate and funeral expenses
Source reference: paras. 15–16, 20These calculations reduced the Tribunal’s award to ₹29,24,200.
Source reference: no citationThe Court found no basis to alter the 8% interest rate
Source reference: paras. 21–22Holding
The appeal was allowed in part.
The award was modified to ₹29,24,200, payable by the insurer with interest at 8% per annum from the date of the petition until deposit; apportionment, disbursement, and deposit were left to the Tribunal’s order
Source reference: para. 23(i)–(iii)Any excess deposited by the insurer was to be refunded, and the Tribunal was directed to draw a modified award
Source reference: para. 23(iv), (vi)Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Motor Vehicles Act, 19881
Original Court PDF
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGERvsSMT. ARCHANA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
