SAROJ & ORS. versus IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 10 S.C.R. 939 · Decided: 24-10-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KAROL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 10 S.C.R. 939 : 2024 INSC 816
Saroj & Ors. 
v. 
IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. & Ors.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 12077-12078 of 2024)
24 October 2024
[Sanjay Karol* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose that in case of conflict of the dates of birth between 
the two documents, School Leaving Certificate and the Aadhar 
Card, which of the two is to be taken as authoritative; and whether 
the High Court’s reduction of the compensation awarded by the 
MACT was justified and in accordance with law.
Headnotes†
Deeds and document – Aadhar Card – Suitability of, to 
determine proof of age, vis-à-vis the school leaving certificate:
Held: Aadhar card may not be used as proof of date of birth – 
Circular No.08 of 2023 by Unique Identification Authority of India, 
to the effect that an Aadhar Card, while can be used to establish 
identity, it is not per se proof of date of birth – Judicial notice has 
been taken of the circular. [Paras 9.6-9.8]
Motor accident – Compensation – Claim of – Determination of 
age of the victim – Death of victim in a motorcycle accident  – 
Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.19,35,400/- with an 
interest @7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition – 
However, the High Court reduced the compensation to 
Rs.9,22,336, on basis of the minimum wage rate and multiplier 
of 13 on basis of the victim’s age as 47 years at the time of 
his death as per his aadhar card – Challenge to, contending 
that the multiplier applicable would be 14 as his age was  
45 years as per his school leaving certificate:
Held: High Court erred in reducing the compensation – Court 
sitting in appeal is not to substitute its view for that of the court 
below – It is only to see that the decision arrived at is not afflicted by 
perversity, illegality or any other such vice which may compromise 
* Author
940
[2024] 10 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
it beyond redemption – Question before the High Court was not 
as to which yardstick to use to determine the notional income of 
the deceased was ‘better’ – Since nothing on record to establish 
that the rates notified by the District Commissioner, would not 
apply to the deceased, no reason to interfere with the finding of 
the tribunal – Furthermore, School Leaving Certificate has been 
accorded statutory recognition under sub-section (2) of s.94 of 
the 2015 Act – Unique Identification Authority of India, by way of 
its Circular No.08 of 2023, has stated that an Aadhar Card, while 
can be used to establish identity, it is not per se proof of date of 
birth – No error in the MACT’s determination of age based on the 
School Leaving Certificate – As regards, the interest awarded, no 
reason recorded by the High Court in the reduction of the rate 
of interest from 7.5% to 6% – Compensation received by way 
of claims filed before MACT is either born out of injury or death 
of the claimant or family member of the claimants and so, the 
amount awarded must do justice to them – It necessarily has to 
be just and reasonable – Thus, fit to enhance the rate of interest 
to 8% – Notional income to be taken as Rs.9000/- as found by the 
tribunal; and the multiplier to be applied is 14 – Just compensation  
rounded off to Rs.15 lakhs with 8% interest from the date of filing 
of the claim petition – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of 
Children) Act, 2015. [Paras 9, 9.1-9.3, 9.6-9.8, 10-12, 14]
Case Law Cited
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India [2015] 9 SCR 99 : (2019) 1 
SCC 1; Manoj Kumar Yadav v. State of M.P., 2023 SCC OnLine 
MP 1919; Shahrukh Khan v. State of M.P., 2023 SCC OnLine 
MP 2740; Navdeep Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors., 2021 
SCC OnLine P&H 4553; Noor Nadia & Anr. v. State of Punjab & 
Ors., 2021 SCC OnLine P&H 1514; Muskan v. State of Punjab, 
2021 SCC OnLine P&H 3649; Parvati Kumari v. State of U.P., 
2019 SCC OnLine All 7085; Kumit Kumar v. State of H.P., 2024 
SCC OnLine HP 2965; Sofikul Islam v. State of Kerala, 2022 SCC 
OnLine Ker 5814; State of Maharashtra v. Unique Identification 
Authority of India and Ors., Criminal Writ Petition No. 3002 of 
2022; Gopalbhai Naranbhai Vaghela v. Union of India & Anr., Order 
dated 26th February, 2024 passed in R/Civil Special Application 
No. 16484 of 2022; Shabana v. NCT of Delhi, 2024 SCC OnLine 
Del 5058; National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017] 13 
SCR 100 : (2017) 16 SCC 680 – referred to.
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 
941
Saroj & Ors. v. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. & Ors.
List of A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.