PREETHA KRISHNAN & ORS. versus THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 11 S.C.R. 487 · Decided: 06-11-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KAROL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 11 S.C.R. 487 : 2025 INSC 1293
Preetha Krishnan & Ors. 
v. 
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
(Special Leave Petition (Civil) No(s). 9753-56 of 2025)
06 November 2025
[Sanjay Karol* and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Grievance of the claimant-appellants is w.r.t the application of 
split multiplier by the High Court, causing a significant reduction 
in the total compensation, as awarded by the Tribunal, vis-à-vis, 
the High Court.
Headnotes†
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Motor Accident Claim – 
Compensation – Calculation of – Application of split 
multiplier – Impermissibility – Deceased, an Assistant Engineer 
in the PWD, aged 51 years died in a car accident – Appellants 
(wife and children of the deceased) sought compensation of 
Rs.60,00,000/-, stating that the deceased earned Rs.47,860/- 
p.m  – Tribunal awarded Rs.44,04,912/- to the appellants 
with interest @ 7.5% p.a – High Court inter alia reduced the 
compensation under the head of loss of dependency from 
Rs.42,29,712/- to Rs.35,10,144/-, by applying a split multiplier 
considering the post-retirement reduction in the income 
of the deceased, thereby deducting the excess amount of 
Rs.7,19,568/- – Review petitions rejected by High Court – 
Challenge to:
Held: Split multiplier is a concept foreign to the Motor Vehicles 
Act, 1988 and is not to be used by the Tribunal and/or Courts 
in calculation of the compensation – The income as on the date 
of death is to be taken to calculate the compensation – A split 
multiplier is not to be adopted, as a matter of course, and is only to 
be used in the exceptional circumstances, with such circumstances 
being recorded – Superannuation from service hardly qualifies as 
such an exceptional circumstance, which would justify the use of 
split multiplier – It is only a natural progression that a person who 
* Author
488
[2025] 11 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
enters service must also exit at some point in time – The same 
cannot be taken as a negative circumstance against the deceased 
person or a person injured severely, leading to incapacitation 
or permanent disability – High Court failed to comply with the 
directives issued in Pranay Sethi i.e., granting 10% enhancement, 
every three years under the conventional heads – Multiplier of 
11 applied, compensation payable to the appellants enhanced 
to Rs.47,76,794/- – Impugned Award passed by the Tribunal, as 
modified by the High Court vide the impugned judgment; and 
judgement in review petitions, modified accordingly. [Paras 17-20]
Directions by Supreme Court – Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Motor 
Accident Claim – Compensation – Calculation of – Application 
of split multiplier – Divergent opinion of High Courts:
Held: Split multiplier is a concept foreign to the Motor Vehicles 
Act, 1988 and is not to be used by the Tribunal and/or Courts 
in calculation of the compensation – A split multiplier is not to 
be adopted, as a matter of course, and is only to be used in 
the exceptional circumstances, with such circumstances being 
recorded  – Directions issued to apply prospectively and the 
conclusions arrived at regarding the split multiplier, shall not affect 
the judgments of the High Courts noticed – A copy of this order to 
be circulated to the Registrars General of all the High Courts for 
necessary information and compliance and also to the Tribunals. 
[Para 22]
Case Law Cited
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017] 13 SCR 100 : 
(2017) 16 SCC 680 – followed.
Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 5 SCR 1098 : (2009) 6 SCC 121; N. 
Jayasree & Ors. v. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. 
Ltd. [2021] 6 SCR 1001 : (2022) 14 SCC 712; Sumathi v. National 
Insurance Co. Ltd., 2021 SCC Online SC 3697 – relied on.
K.R. Madhusudhan v. Administrative Officer [2011] 2 SCR 1061 : 
(2011) 4 SCC 689; Puttamma v. K.L. Narayana Reddy & Ors. 
[2013] 16 SCR 83 : (2013) 15 SCC 45 – referred to.
List of Acts
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
[2025] 11 S.C.R. 
489
Preetha Krishnan & Ors. v. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
List of Keywords
Split multiplier; Application of split multiplier; Calculation of 
compensation; Reduction in total compensation; Post-retirement 
reduction in income of deceased; Superannuation from service 
not an exceptional circumstance.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil) 
No(s). 9753-9756 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.06.2024 and 27.11.2024 
of the High Court of Kera
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.