LexMAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. versus NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
664
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
v.
NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 9581 of 2018)
SEPTEMBER 18, 2018
[R. F. NARIMAN AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Compensation under – Various
heads – Person died in an accident when the motor cycle driven by
him was hit by a car driven by respondent no.3 – MACT granted
Rs.3,39,208/- with 7% interest as compensation to respondent nos.
1 and 2, father and sister of the deceased – High Court granted
Rs.14,21,000/- with interest @ 9% – Challenged by appellant-
Insurance Company – Held: High Court’s finding regarding income
of the deceased to be Rs.6,000/- p.m. is correct – High Court
correctly considered respondent nos.1 and 2 to be dependents of
the deceased, and made a deduction of 1/3rd towards personal
expenses of the deceased – Judgment of the High Court affirmed
on this count – Amount awarded by the High Court towards loss of
love and affection is also maintained – However, since deceased
was 24 years old at the time of the accident, hence, in view of decision
of Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi case, future Prospects is awarded
at 40% of the actual income of the deceased, instead of 50% as
awarded by the High Court – Further, also in view of decision in
Pranay Sethi case, compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral
expenses decreased to Rs.15,000/- – Though neither MACT nor
High Court awarded any compensation to respondent nos.1 and 2
under “Loss of Estate”, in exercise of power u/Art.142 and in the
interests of justice, Rs.15,000/- awarded under this head – Further,
respondent nos.1 and 2 also awarded Rs. 40,000/- each for loss of
“Filial Consortium” – Respondent nos.1 and 2 entitled to total
compensation of Rs.14,25,600/- with interest @ 12% p.a.– Appellant
and respondent no. 3 jointly and severally liable to pay the
compensation – Constitution of India – Art.142.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Beneficial Legislation – Purpose
of – Discussed.
[2018] 11 S.C.R. 664
664
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
665
Words & Phrases – “Consortium” – Meaning of – Discussed.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 With respect to the issue of Future Prospects,
a Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi case held that
in case the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, and
was below 40 years of age, an addition of 40% of the established
income should be granted towards Future Prospects. Future
Prospects are to be awarded on the basis of: (i) the nature of the
deceased’s employment; and (ii) the age of the deceased. The
MACT as well as the High Court assessed the income of the
deceased on the basis of the minimum wage of an unskilled
worker. The nature of his employment being taken as a self-
employed person. The High Court took his income to be Rs.6,000,
which is marginally above the minimum wage of an unskilled
worker at Rs.5,342. This finding is not being interfered with. The
deceased was 24 years old at the time of the accident. Hence,
Future Prospects ought to have been awarded at 40% of the actual
income of the deceased, instead of 50% as awarded by the High
Court. Hence, the judgment of the High Court on this issue is
modified to that extent. [Paras 8.1 and 8.3] [671-F-H; 672-B-C, G]
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16
SCC 680 – followed.
1.2 The deceased was a bachelor, whose mother had pre-
deceased him. The deceased was living in a village with his father
who was about 65 years old, and respondent no.2- an unmarried
sister. The deceased was contributing a part of his meagre income
to the family for their sustenance and survival. Hence, they would
be entitled to compensation as his dependents. The High Court
correctly considered them to be dependents of the deceased,
and made a deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the
deceased. The judgment of the High Court is, therefore, affirmed
on this count. [Para 8.2, 8.4] [673-B; 672-F]
1.3 As per the judgment in Pranay Sethi case the
compensation of Rs. 25,000 towards funeral expenses is
decreased to Rs.15,000. The amount awarded by the High Court
towards loss of love and affection is, however, maintained. [Para
8.5] [673-C, F-G]
MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. NANU RAM
ALIAS CHUHRU RAM & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
666
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
1.4 The MACT as well as the High Court did not award any
compensation with respect to Loss of Consortium and Loss of
EExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.