LexSANOBANU NAZIRBHAI MIRZA & ORS. versus AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2013] 9 S.C.R. 882 SANOBANU NAZIRBHAI MIRZA & ORS. v. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE (Civil Appeal No. 8251 of 2013) OCTOBER 03, 2013 [G.S. SINGHVI AND V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.] MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988: c s. 166 - Fatal motor accident - Compensation - Annual income of deceased-Polisher -- Addition towards future prospects - Multiplier - Tribunal and High Court taking annual income of deceased at Rs. 150001- -- Held: Claim petition having been filed u/s. 166, taking notional income of 0 deceased at Rs. 15, 0001- per annum on the basis of /Ind Schedule to s. 163-A is an erroneous approach to determine just and reasonable compensation in favour of legal representatives of the deceased who was the sole earning member of family - Deceased was working as a polisher, E which is a skilled job - Keeping in view the evidence on record, it would be just and proper to take a sum of Rs. 50001 - as monthly income of deceased - Since deceased was se/f- emplo yed and about 25 years of age, there must be an addition of 50 % to his actual income - There being 5 F dependents, 1!5th amount is to be deducted towards personal expenses - Keeping in view life expectancy of deceased, multiplier of 20 must be applied - Besides, Rs. 1, 00, 0001- must be added towards loss of consortium and further Rs. 1,00,0001- under the head loss of care and guidance of minor children -- Total compensation allowed as Rs. 16,96,0001- G as detailed in the judgment - Further directions with regard to payment, its apportionment amongst dependents and fixed deposits, given. s. 166 - Fatal motor accident - Compensation - Tribunal H 882 SANOBANU NAZIRBHAI MIRZA v. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL 883 TRANSPORT SERVICE awarding Rs. 3,51,3001- as total compensation - High Court A. reducing it to Rs. 2,51,5001- and directing to return Rs. 99,5001 - to respondent with 9 % interest - Held: The finding of fact recorded by Tribunal in the absence of any evidence in rebuttal to show that deceased was not working as a polisher and it is not a skilled work, is an erroneous finding for the B reason that both Tribunal and High Court have not assigned reason for not accepting the evidence on record with regard to the nature of work that was being performed by deceased - - State Government in exercise of its statutory power uls. 3 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 must issue a notification for fixing c the wages of a polisher -- Even in the absence of such a notification, both Tribunal as well as High Court should have at least taken the income of deceased as Rs.40,0001- per annum as per the table provided in the /Ind Schedule to s. 163-A of M. V. Act for the purpose of determining just, fair and 0 reasonable compensation under the heading loss of dependency of appellants, though said amount is applicable only to the claims under no fault liability - Minimum Wages Act, 1923 - s. 3 - Legislation. s. 166 - Claim petition - Enhancement of compensation E in appeal - Held: Legal representatives of deceased are entitled to compensation as mentioned under various heads in the table as provided in the judgment -- Even though certain claims were not preferred by them, they are legally and legitimately entitled for the said claims -- Accordingly, the F Court awards compensation, more than what was claimed by dependants as it is the statutory duty of Tribunal and appellate court to award just and reasonable compensation to legal representatives of deceased to mitigate their hardship and agony, as they filed application u/s. 166. G A youngman of 25 years was crushed under the bus belonging to the respondent. He succumbed to the injuries the same day. In a petition filed by the appellants- dependants u/s. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it H 884 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 9 S.C.R. A was stated that the deceased was a polisher and was earning Rs. 4000 - 5000/- per month. However, the Tribunal took a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per annum as notional income as provided in II Schedule to s. 163-A of the Act, and awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,51,300/- with 9% interest. B On appeal by the respondent, the High Court reduced the compensation to Rs. 2,51,800/- and directed the claimants to refund Rs. 99,500/- with 9% interest to the respondent. Allowing the appeal, the Court C HELD: 1.1 The approach of the Tribunal in taking notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum to which Rs.30,000/- was added and divid
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.