LexRAJESH & OTHERS versus RAJBIR SINGH & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2013] 5 S.C.R. 961 RAJESH & OTHERS v. RAJBIR SINGH & OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 3860 of 2013) APRIL 12, 2013 [G.S. SINGHVI, KURIAN JOSEPH AND SHARAD ARVIND BOBDE, JJ.] A B Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Fatal accident - Compensation - Grant of - Addition to actual income of the C deceased towards future prospects - Norms laid down with regard to salaried persons in Sar/a Verma case - Further explained in Santosh Devi case, and also. made applicable · to self-employed and persons on fixed wages - Clarification now given in regard to self-employed and persons on fixed D wages with reference to their age - Held: In case the deceased victim was below 40 years, there must be an addition of 50% to the actualincome of the deceased while computing future prospects - Addition should be 30% in case the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years - Since in case of those E self-employed or on fixed wages, there is normally no age of superannuation, it will only be just and equitable to provide an addition of 15% in the case where the victim was between the age group of 50 to 60 years - There should normally be no addition thereafter. F Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s. 166 - Fatal accident - Grant of compensation - Loss of consortium to the spouse - Held: The loss of companionship, love, care and protection, etc., the spouse is entitled to get, has to be compensated appropriately - On facts, it would only be just and reasonable G that the courts award at least Rs. 1 /akh for loss of consortium. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s. 166 - Fatal accident - Grant of compensation - 'Funeral Expenses' - Held: 961 H 962 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013) 5 S.C.R. A Tribunals have been quite frugal with regard to award of compensation under the head 'Funeral Expenses' - 'Price Index' has gone up in that regard also - On facts, it will be just, fair and equitable, under the head of 'Funeral Expenses', in the absence of evidence to the contrary for higher B expenses, to award at least an amount of Rs. 25, 0001. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s. 166 - Fatal accident - Deceased aged 33 years - Earning salary of Rs. 9, 5201- per month - Compensation - Grant of - Held: 50% salary added C as future prospects-114th deducted as personal expenses of the deceased - Multiplier of 16 applied - Rs. 1 lakh awarded towards loss of consortium and further Rs. 1 /akh towards loss of care and guidance for minor children - Rs. 25, ODO/- awarded towards funeral expenses - Total compensation awarded amounting to Rs.22,81,3201-. D Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Just compensation - Meaning of - Held: 'Just Compensation' is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the faqts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered E as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying the well-settled principles relating to award of compensation. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Compensation - F Duty of the Court - To fix just compensation, i"espective of the claim - Held: The Court should not succumb to niceties or technicalities, in matters relating to compensation - Attempt of the Court should be to equate, as far as possible, the misery on account of the accident with the compensation so that the injured/the dependants should not face the vagaries G of life on account of the discontinuance of the income earned by the victim - Tribunal/Court has a duty, i"espective of the claims made in the Application, if any, to properly award a just, equitable, fair and reasonable compensation, if necessary, ignoring the claim made in the application for H compensation. · RAJESH v. RAJBIR SINGH 963 Words and Phrases -'Consortium' - Meaning of. A A 33 year old person died in an accident. The deceased was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.6,926/-. His dependants claimed compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Claims Tribunal ~educted B 1/3rd towards personal expenses, applied multiplier of 16 and further awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards all other conventional heads and the compensation was rounded off to Rs.8,96,500/- with interest@ 7.5% from the date of the filing of the petition. c The High Court, following Sarla Verma case,. modified the award holding that only 1/4th should have been deducted from the income. An amount of Rs.10,000/- was also awarded for loss of consortium in addition to Rs.10,000/- already granted by the Tribunal on
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.