HARDEO KAUR AND ORS. versus RAJASTHAN STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANR.

Citation: [1992] 2 S.C.R. 272 · Decided: 13-03-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
HARDEO KAUR AND ORS. 
v. 
RAJASTHAN STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANR. 
MARCH 13, 1992 
B 
r 
(KULDIP SINGH AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.] 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1939: 
Sections 110 and 110-B-Accident claim-A ward of compensa-
c tion-Criteria for-Detennination of-Adoption of Liberal approach-Need 
...(. 
for. 
The first appellant, her husband-a young Army Officer of 36 years· 
.)iii. 
and their two minor sons were injured in a road accident when the 
'I'-. 
repondent-State Road Transport Corporation's bus struck against the car 
D in which they were travelling. While the appellant's husband succumbed 
to the injuries, one of the sons received multiple injuries and another 
received injury on the forehead and multiple abrasions on various parts 
of the body. The first appellant, however, received minor injuries. 
E 
The first appellant; her two minor sons and daughter filed a claim 
petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal found 
that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the bus 
,... 
by the driver. Regarding quantum of compensation, it held that the 
deceased was spending half of his salary on his personal needs, that the 
normal life expectancy of the deceased, who was 36 years of age when the 
F 
mishap occurred, was 20 years sine~ the normal life span of an army 
Officer \VaS 56 years and, therefore, a compensation of Rs. 2,64,000 should 
be awarded for the loss of the deceased's life, and that after deduction of 
-i 
1/3 on account of lumpsum payment, an amount of Rs. 1,76,000 should be 
-4 
paid as damages to heirs of the deceased. The Tribunal also aw~rded Rs. 
G 3,000 ~nd Rs. 1,000 respectively to the two sons. It further awarded interest 
at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of application before the 
Tribunal till the ·date of realisation. The widow a:od her children filed 
appeal before the High Court for enhancement of compen~ation but the 
same was dismissed. 
~ 
H 
In the appeal, by special leave, bef0re this Court on behalf of the 
272 
, 
' 
HARDEO KAUR v. RAJASTIIAN S.T.C. 
273 
widow, and her minor children, it was contended that the finding of the A 
Courts below that the deceased, being an army officer used to spend one 
half of his salary on personal expenditure, was grossly erroneous and 
based on mere surmises and conjectures, that it was specifically pleaded 
before the Tribunal that the deceased used to spend nearly Rs. 1,400 per 
month on his family, which was solely dependent upon him, that there was B 
no basis to take the life span of an army officer to be 56 years, and it should 
be taken to be 70 years in the modern environments, that the deduction of 
1/3rd assessed compensation on account of lumpsum payment was wholly 
unjustified, that the compensation awarded to the minor children was on 
the lower side and that no compensation was awarded for loss of consor-
tium to wife and the minor children. 
C 
Allowing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD : 1.1 There was no basis or justification before the Tribunal 
to have reached the finding that the deceased was spending half of the 
salary on himself. On the other hand, it was specifically claimed by the D 
appellants that he was spending nearly Rs. 1,400 per month to support his 
family. It is common knowledge that personal needs of army officers 
including drinks are supplied to them at a subsidised price through the 
Army canteens. Therefore, the finding of the courts below is set aside. The 
deceased was spending Rs. 1,400 per month on his family. [2778-C] 
E 
1.2 The span of life should be taken to be 70 years in view of the 
high rise in life expectancy. It is specially so in the case of Army officers 
who are disciplined to live an active and energetic life. The courts below 
were, therefore, not justified in taking the normal span of life to be 60 years 
and that of an Army officer 56 years. [277D] 
F 
Jyotsna Dey v. State of Assam, (1987) ACJ 172, applied. 
1.3 The deduction of l/3rd out of the assessed compensation on 
account of lumpsum payment is not justified. The accident took place in 
July, 1977 and ~he litigation has come to an end, 15 years thereafter. The G 
delay in the final disposal of motor accident compensation cases, as in all 
other classes of litigation, takes a sting out of the laws of compensation 
and added to that the monstrous inflation and the consequent fall in the 
value of rupee makes the compensation demanded years ago, less than 
quarter of its valu

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.