LexNIDHI BHARGAVA & ORS. A1: NIDHI BHARGAVA A2: MANUJ BHARGAVA A3: ANUJ BHARGAVA versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. R1: NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS REGIONAL MANAGER R2: K. L. BHARGAVA R3: ANIL KUMAR KUKREJA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 1468 : 2025 INSC 526 Nidhi Bhargava & Ors. A1: Nidhi Bhargava A2: Manuj Bhargava A3: Anuj Bhargava v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. R1: National Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Regional Manager R2: K. L. Bhargava R3: Anil Kumar Kukreja (Civil Appeal No. 5398 of 2025) 22 April 2025 [Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in reducing the compensation payable to the appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- to Rs.16,97,370/- maintaining the interest awarded at the rate of 9% p.a. Headnotes† Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 – s.166 r/w. s.140 – On 12.08.2008, a Bus allegedly driven in a negligent manner hit a motorcycle, which was driven by victim along with his wife – Victim died – Claim petition filed – MACT awarded a compensation of Rs.31,41,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Claim Petition – However, the High Court reduced the compensation payable to the appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- to Rs.16,97,370/- – Correctness: Held: The High Court interfered and reduced the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal only on the ground that Return for the Assessment Year 2008-2009 had to be excluded from consideration – It is not in dispute that the deceased was a businessman – The relevance of the Income Tax Return stems, in the context of the Act, for the period which it relates to i.e., the Financial Year concerned, and not on the date on which it is filed with the Income Tax Department – When faced with Returns * Author [2025] 4 S.C.R. 1469 Nidhi Bhargava & Ors. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. for different Assessment Years, it would be upto the Tribunal concerned to adopt either the average income therefrom or choose an Assessment Year to rely upon – There is good reason to leave judicial discretion on the Tribunal to adopt one of the afore-noted two courses of action, bearing in nature the social purpose and object behind the Act, which is a beneficial legislation – It is quite unfortunate that the High Court in the present case has dealt with the matter in such a casual and superficial way where the rightful claim of the appellants under a welfare legislation has been drastically reduced without any cogent reason on a very tenuous ground – Thus, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the original amount Rs.31,41,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation is restored. [Paras 15, 16] Case Law Cited Malarvizhi v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. [2019] 16 SCR 1086 : (2020) 4 SCC 228; S Vishnu Ganga v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 182; Shivaleela v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. [2025] 4 SCR 63 : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 563 – referred to. List of Acts Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. List of Keywords Motor Vehicle Accident Claim; Compensation; Reduction of compensation; Income Tax Returns; Rightful claim. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5398 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2018 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in MACAP No. 589 of 2018 Appearances for Parties Adv. for the Appellants: Kaushik Choudhury. Advs. for the Respondents: Abhishek Gola, Anshul Mehral, Viresh B. Saharya, Akshat Agarwal, Rishabh Mathur. 1470 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. Leave granted. 2. This appeal arises from the Final Judgment and Order dated 20.09.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) [2018:DHC:6122 | 2018 SCC OnLine Del 11494] in MAC. APP. No.589 of 2018 rendered by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘High Court’) filed by Respondent No.1-Insurance Company, whereby the High Court disposed of the appeal by reducing the compensation payable to the Appellants from Rs.31,41,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-One Thousand) to Rs.16,97,370/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy) maintaining the interest awarded at the rate of 9% per annum. FACTS IN BRIEF: 3. On 12.08.2008, a Blue Line bus bearing Registration No.DL- 1PB-0035, being driven by one Javed Aftar in an allegedly negligent manner, hit a motorcycle bearing Registration No.DL-6SX-6483, which was being driven by Kapil Bhargava (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) along with his wife (Appellant No.1), as a result of which the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.