01Facts
The appellant, widow of Biren Lodh, sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, after her husband was fatally struck by a bus on 27 March 2009.
pp. 3–6The Tribunal found that the accident resulted from the driver’s rash and negligent driving and awarded Rs. 3,48,000, calculating dependency on a monthly income of Rs. 3,000 and adding modest amounts under conventional heads.
pp. 3–6The claimant appealed under Section 173, seeking enhancement; the insurer’s liability was not challenged in this appeal
pp. 3–602Issues
i.Whether the Tribunal correctly assessed the deceased’s monthly income at Rs. 3,000 in the absence of evidence supporting the claimed income of Rs. 6,000
pp. 5–6, 9ii.Whether the compensation should be enhanced by adding future prospects and revising the amounts awarded under conventional heads
pp. 5–6, 7–903Law Applied
Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, compensation must be just.
Sarla Verma (Smt.) v. Delhi Transport Corporation, [2009] 6 SCC 121, guides the deduction for personal expenses and selection of the multiplier; for a deceased aged 45, the applicable multiplier is 14
pp. 7–8National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, [2017] 16 SCC 680, permits a 25% addition for future prospects for a self-employed person aged 40 to 50, and sets conventional-head amounts of Rs. 15,000 for loss of estate, Rs. 40,000 for loss of consortium and Rs. 15,000 for funeral expenses, subject to 10% enhancement every three years
p. 8Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173Section 166
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 279Section 427
04Reasoning
The Court treated the deceased as self-employed because he had no permanent salaried employment.
pp. 6, 8–9It declined to increase his income to Rs. 6,000 per month because the claimant had produced no evidence of the bicycle-repair shop or the asserted earnings, and therefore retained the Tribunal’s figure of Rs. 3,000
pp. 6, 8–9Applying Pranay Sethi, it added 25% for future prospects; after deducting one-third for personal expenses and applying multiplier 14, it calculated loss of dependency at Rs. 4,20,000.
pp. 8–9It also revised the conventional-head amounts in accordance with that decision
pp. 8–905Holding
The appeal was allowed to the extent stated.
p. 10The Court held that the claimant was entitled to enhancement while leaving the monthly-income finding undisturbed.
p. 10It directed the insurer to pay Rs. 72,000 as additional loss-of-dependency compensation, with 6% annual interest from the date of the claim application until payment, and a further Rs. 72,700 under conventional heads within two months.
p. 10The Tribunal was directed to disburse the deposited amount to the claimant upon identification
p. 10Original Court PDF
Kumari Chinu LodhvsDeputy Secretary And 2 Ors,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
