9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 1332 - SC - Indian LawsQuantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal - excessive or not - appropriate method for determining the deceased s monthly income for compensation calculation - HELD THAT - It is pertinent to note that the only available documentary evidence on record of the monthly income of the deceased is the income tax return filed by him with the Income Tax Department. The High Court was correct therefore to determine the monthly income on the basis of the income tax return. However the High Court erred in ascertaining the net income of the deceased as the amount to be taken into consideration for calculating compensation in the light of the principle laid down by this Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava and Ors. 2007 (12) TMI 538 - SUPREME COURT . The High Court erred in making deductions under various heads to arrive at the net income instead of ascertaining the gross income of the deceased out of the annual income earned from his occupation mentioned in the income tax return submitted for the relevant financial year 1994-1995. As per the Income Tax return of the financial year 1994-1995 produced on record the deceased was earning Rs. 88, 660/- per annum or Rs. 7330/- per month. Further the deceased being 46 years of age at the time of death he is entitled to 30% increase in the future prospects of income - Also since the deceased was 46 years of age at the time of the accident a multiplier of 13 seems appropriate for determining the quantum of compensation. Conclusion - An interest @ 9% per annum on the compensation to be awarded to the Appellants-claimants granted. The compensation awarded shall be apportioned between the Appellants equally with proportionate interest. We direct the Insurance Company to deposit 50% of the awarded amount with proportionate interest in any of the Nationalized Bank of the choice of the Appellants for a period of 3 years. Appeal disposed off.
ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The primary issues considered in this judgment include:
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Determination of Monthly Income The High Court initially relied on the income tax return to determine the deceased's monthly income, dismissing the oral evidence provided by the deceased's wife. The High Court calculated the monthly income as Rs. 3,115 based on the income tax return, which was contested by the Appellants. The Supreme Court referenced the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava, emphasizing that only statutory deductions like income tax should be considered, not other contributions that constitute savings. Consequently, the Supreme Court determined the gross income based on the income tax return, resulting in a monthly income of Rs. 7,330. Application of Multiplier The High Court applied a multiplier of 13, considering the deceased's age of 46. The Supreme Court upheld this application, citing the precedent set in Sarla Verma and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr., which supports using a multiplier of 13 for individuals aged 46. Deductions for Personal Expenses The Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle from Sarla Verma, which requires a deduction of 1/3rd for personal expenses when the deceased leaves behind a spouse and children. This deduction was applied to the gross income to arrive at the compensation amount. Compensation for Loss of Consortium, Love and Affection, and Funeral Expenses The High Court's compensation for loss of consortium and love and affection was deemed inadequate. The Supreme Court referenced Rajesh and Ors. v. Rajbir Singh and Ors., which suggests higher compensation for these losses. The Court awarded Rs. 1,00,000 each for loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. Additionally, Rs. 1,00,000 was awarded for loss of estate and expectation of life, and Rs. 50,000 for funeral expenses and litigation costs. Interest Rate on Compensation The High Court reduced the interest rate from 12% to 9%. The Supreme Court concurred with this decision, aligning with the precedent in Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association and Ors., which supports a 9% interest rate. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and modified the compensation as follows:
The judgment emphasizes the importance of considering gross income for compensation calculations, applying appropriate multipliers based on age, and ensuring adequate compensation for non-economic losses. The decision reflects a commitment to ensuring fair and just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
|
