NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. versus MANNAT JOHAL & ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [2019] 6 S.C.R. 683 · Decided: 23-04-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
683
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
v.
MANNAT JOHAL & ORS. ETC. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos.. 4079-4081 of 2019)
APRIL 23, 2019
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND
DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Offending vehicle, an oil tanker
rammed into the car driven by one ‘RSJ’, with his wife and children
also in it, while coming from the opposite direction – ‘RSJ’ died –
Claims filed by the parents of the deceased and wife and minor
children of the deceased stating that the he was 38 yrs of age,
working as General Manager (Marketing) with a Company, was
drawing gross annual salary of Rs. 3,21,801.60 with perks just
prior to the accident; and was due to be promoted as the Associate
Vice President – Tribunal awarded Rs.37,71,000/- as compensation
to the claimants inter alia with interest @ 12% p.a. – High Court
enhanced the compensation to Rs.47,95,000/- and rounded it up to
Rs. 48,00,000/- with interest @7.5% p.a. – On appeal, held:  Award
made by the Tribunal suffered from few fundamental errors and
shortcomings as regards the assessment of multiplicand – Tribunal,
instead of taking the last drawn emoluments of the deceased, chose
to proceed on his enhanced projected emoluments after the expected
promotion and pay revision but, did not provide for further future
prospects – Assessment made by the Tribunal not in conformity with
the principles in Pranay Sethi case – Assessment made by the High
Court stands more or less in conformity with the principles
enunciated in Pranay Sethi case – Only doubtful area is that the
High Court enhanced future prospects only at 40% on the last drawn
emoluments of the deceased and not at 50% though he was shown
to be in a settled employment with future chances of promotion as
also pay revision – However, on facts no modification made in the
amount awarded by the High Court – Pecuniary loss assessed by
the High Court is reasonable and does not call for any interference
– High Court modified the interest component at reasonable rate of
7.5% p.a. – No reason to allow the interest at any rate higher than
   [2019] 6 S.C.R. 683
683
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
684
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 6 S.C.R.
that – Amount ultimately receivable by the claimants in terms of the
judgment of the High Court remains that of just compensation – No
case for interference made out.
Compensation – Ex-gratia amount received by the claimants
from employer of the deceased – If to be deducted from the
compensation received by claimants – Plea of insurer relying on
Shashi Sharma case that the said ex-gratia amount so received by the
claimants be deducted from the compensation granted by the High
Court – Held: Decision in Shashi Sharma would not apply to the
facts of the present case – No deduction in the amount awarded by
the High Court.
Compensation – Vehicular accident – Assessment of
compensation – Factors for – Discussed.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1  The modified award made by the High Court in
this case remains that of just compensation and no case for
interference is made out in either of these appeals. While dealing
with the question of quantification in a claim for compensation
under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the endeavor has to
be to ensure awarding of just compensation to the claimant/s.
[Paras 7, 8][692-C-D]
1.2 In a case like the present one, relating to the death of
the vehicular accident victim, any process of awarding “just”
compensation involves assessment of such amount of pecuniary
loss which could be reasonably taken as the loss of dependency
suffered by the claimants due to the demise of the victim. In other
words, such a process, by its very nature, involves the assessment
of monetary contribution that the claimants were likely to receive
from the deceased had he not met with the untimely end due to
the accident. For the purpose of such an assessment, while some
of the basic facts, like the age, job and income of the deceased
and the number of dependents with extent of their dependency,
could be reasonably ascertained from the evidence on record,
yet, several uncertain factors also, per force, come into play, like
the future prospects of the deceased coupled with various
imponderables related with a human life. As the process, by its
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
685
very nature, involves a substantial deal of guess-work, this Court,
over the years, has evolved and applied several principles so as
to ensure that as far as possible, the methods for assessment
remain uniform, curbing against 

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