REBEKA MINZ AND ORS. versus DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: [2012] 7 S.C.R. 381 · Decided: 23-08-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2012] 7 S.C.R. 381 
REBEKA MINZ AND ORS. 
v. 
DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. 
LTD. AND ANR. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 5399-5400 of 2012) 
AUGUST 23, 2012 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM 
KALIFULLA, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Accidental death - Quantum 
C 
of compensation - Appropriate multiplier - Rate of interest 
payable - Held: Since the deceased was stated to be 35 years 
old at the time of his death, the multiplier would be 16 which 
has to be applied for calculating the compensation - The 
Tribunal had found that after deducting 113rd of personal 
D 
expenses, the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 7, 0001 
- and the net contribution to the family was ascertained at Rs. 
84, 0001- p. a - Applying the multiplier of 16, the compensation 
works out to Rs. 13,44,0001- - Said sum of Rs. 13,44,0001-to 
carry interest@ 7% p.a. from the date of application till the 
E 
date of realization. 
One person while riding on a scooter met with an 
accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver 
of a truck and consequently died. The appellants being 
the wife and children of the deceased preferred claim 
before the Motor Accidents Tribunal. The Tribunal 
awarded a sum of Rs.10,08,000/- as compensation 
alongwith interest @ 7% for specified period. While 
appellants were aggrieved insofar as the Tribunal applied 
F 
the multiplier 12 instead of 17, having regard to the fact 
G 
that the deceased at the time of his death was 35 years 
old as well as non-grant of interest for certain period, the 
first respondent-insurance company was aggrieved of the 
381 
H 
382 
SUPREME. COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 
A very award of compensation itself. In appeal, the High 
Court reduced the amount of compensation to 
Rs.5,00,000/- and also the rate of interest to 6% (payable 
from the date of the claim application till deposit of the 
amount). Hence the present appeals. 
B 
c 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. The impugned order of the High Court 
being a non-speaking order calls for interference. [Para 
3] [385-A] 
2.1. Since the deceased was stated to be 35 years old 
at the time of his death, the multiplier would be 16 which 
has to be applied for calculating the compensation. The 
Tribunal after examining the materials before it, found that 
0 after deducting 1/3rd of personal expenses, the monthly 
income of the deceased was Rs.7,000/- and the net 
contribution to the family was ascertained at Rs. 84,000/ 
- per annum. Applying the multiplier of 16, the 
compensation works out to Rs. 13,44,000/-. Therefore, 
E while setting aside the order of the High Court insofar as 
it reduced the quantum of compensation, the 
compensation payable to the appellants is modified to a 
sum of Rs. 13,44,000/- [84,000/- x 16]. The said sum of Rs. 
13,44,000/-should carry interest at the rate of 7% per 
annum from the date of application till the date of 
F realization. [Para 5] [386-A-C] 
2.2. The first respondent is, therefore, directed to pay 
to the appellants the total amount of compensation in the 
sum of Rs. 13,44,000/- after giving credit to whatever 
G payment already made by calculating the rate of interest 
from the date of application till realization. Such payment 
should be made in the proportion as set out by the 
Tribunal in the last para of its order dated 10.07.2007. With 
the above modification in the quantum of compensation 
H and the rate of interest payable right from the date of 
REBEKA MINZ v. DIV. MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE 383 
CO. LTD. 
application, the compensation shall be made within a 
A 
period of three months from the date of this order. (Para 
6) [386-D-F] 
Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & 
Ors. 2012 (6) SCC 421; Sar/a Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport 
B 
Corporation & Anr. 2009 (6) SCC 121: 2009 (5) SCR 1098 -
relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
2012 (6) sec 421 
2009 (5) SCR 1098 
relied on 
relied on 
Para 4, 5 
C 
Para 4 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 
5399-5400 of 2012. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 05.03.2009 of the High 
Court of Orissa, Cuttack in M.A.C.A. No. 953 of 2007 and 
M.A.C.A. No. 821 of 2007. 
P.M. Misra, K.N. Tripathy for the Appellants. 
Devabrata for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
D 
E 
FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J. 1. These 
appeals at the instance of the claimants before the Motor 
F 
Accidents claims Tribunals challenge the common order of the 
High Court of Orissa, Cu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.