RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS

Citation: [2020] 6 S.C.R. 579 · Decided: 18-06-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: NAVIN SINHA · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
579
RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS
v.
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED AND OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 2624 of 2020)
JUNE 18, 2020
[NAVIN SINHA AND B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Accident – Enhancement of compensation –
Victims, a housewife and her minor daughter, were travelling in a
horse cart, which was hit by a bus resulting in their death – The
Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,54,500/- for the housewife
and Rs. 1,60,000/- for the minor child – Appeal for enhancement of
compensation dismissed by the High Court – On appeal, held:
Deduction of 50% made by the Tribunal towards contributory
negligence while calculating the award is totally unjustified and
unsustainable since no fault can be attributed to the deceased as
they were passengers, not the driver or the owner of the house cart
– Furthermore, if the housewife had survived, her contributions to
the welfare and care of the family would have only been enhanced
by time – Therefore, Appellants entitled to future prospects at the
rate of 40% in addition to the loss of consortium and future expenses
already granted – Thus, total compensation for housewife enhanced
to Rs. 11,96,000/- – Insofar as minor child is concerned, in the
entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case compensation
enhanced to Rs. 2,95,000/-
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. No evidence has been led by the appellant with
regard to any income of the first deceased from dairy business.
The deceased were travelling in a horse cart along with others to
a religious congregation. It is not the case of the respondents
that the first deceased was driving the horse cart or was the owner
of the same, much less that it was being driven under her
supervision. The deceased were travelling as passengers along
with others. The fact that the horse cart may have been in middle
of the road at the time of the accident, no fault can be attributed
[2020] 6 S.C.R. 579
579
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
580
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 6 S.C.R.
to the deceased holding them liable to contributory negligence
and denial of full compensation. This Court fails to understand
how the deceased who were passengers in the horse cart can be
held liable in any manner. The deduction of 50% towards
contributory negligence in both the appeals is therefore held to
be totally unjustified and unsustainable. The finding with regard
to contributory negligence against both the deceased are
therefore set aside. [Para 8][583-A-C]
2. The notional income of the first deceased-housewife is
therefore held to be Rs.5000/- per month at the time of death.
The compensation on that basis with a deduction of 1/4th i.e.
Rs.15,000/- towards personal expenses with a multiplier of 17 is
assessed at Rs.7,65,000/-. If the deceased had survived, in view
of observations in Lata Wadhwa, her skills as a matured and
skilled housewife in contributing to the welfare and care of the
family and in the upbringing of the children would have only been
enhanced by time and for which reason we hold that the appellants
shall be entitled to future prospects at the rate of 40% in addition
to the loss of consortium and future expenses already granted.
This Court therefore assesses the total compensation payable to
the appellants in the first appeal at Rs.11,96,000/-. [Para 
11]
[584-F-H]
3. The deduction on account of contributory negligence has
already been held to be unsustainable. The determination of a
just and proper compensation to the appellants with regard to
the deceased child, in the entirety of the facts and circumstances
of the case does not persuade this Court to enhance the same
any further from Rs.2,95,000/- by granting any further
compensation under the separate head of “future prospects”.
[Para 15][586-F-G]
Arun Kumar Agrawal v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
(2010) 9 SCC 218 : [2010] 9 SCR 303; New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satender (2006) 13 SCC 60 :
[2006] 8 Suppl. SCR 745 – relied on.
Kajal v. Jagdish Chand & Ors. AIR 2020 SC 776 :
(2020) 4 SCC 413 – distinguished.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
581
Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar (2001) 8 SCC 197 :
[2001] 1 Suppl. SCR 578; R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal (2009)
14 SCC 1 : [2009] 10 SCR 87 – referred to.
Case Law Reference
(2020) 4 SCC 413
distinguished
Para 6
[2001] 1 Suppl. SCR 578
referred to
Para 9
[2010] 9 SCR 303
relied on
Para 10
[2009] 10 SCR 87
referred to
Paras 12 & 13
[2006] 8 Suppl. SCR 745
relied on
Para 14
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2624
of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order d

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