Karnataka High Court: The Single Judge Bench of Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju modified the impugned award and judgment by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, enhancing the compensation to ₹10,02,888. The Court took into consideration the future prospects of the family while assessing compensation.
The Court observed that,
“The contribution of a housewife to the family would naturally increase with age, experience and maturity; therefore, an addition towards future prospects must be made to the notional income while computing the loss of dependency.”
Background
The case arose when the deceased was traveling in car near Yellyur Kodi, Toobinakere on Bengaluru-Mysuru road, when a lorry being driven by Respondent 1 in a rash and negligent manner collided with the appellants’ car, which resulted in the death of the deceased.
The appellants are the husband and children of the deceased, who filed an appeal challenging the awarded of compensation of ₹7,60,000 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 15 May 2019.
The appellants raised two grounds of challenge in the present appeal. Firstly, the notional income of the deceased was wrongly taken as ₹7500 per month. Since the accident occurred in the year 2014, the notional income was required to be taken as ₹8500 per month. Secondly, the future prospects were not awarded considering the deceased was the wife and mother of the appellants and that she was the house wife managing the household work.
Issue
-
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?
-
Whether the claimant is entitled to addition of future prospects of the deceased housewife while computing loss of dependency?
Decision and Analysis
This Court after examining the award of the learned Tribunal, observed that while calculating the loss of dependency, the income of the deceased was taken at ₹7500. After taking into consideration that the deceased was aged 55 years and the applicable multiplier being “11”, the loss of dependency would be calculated in the following manner:
Loss of Dependency: 8500 x 1/3 x 12 x 11 + 10% = ₹8,22,888
The Court reiterating the judgment of the case Rajendra Singh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020) 7 SCC 256 observed that the contribution of a housewife to the family would naturally increase with age, experience and maturity; therefore, an addition towards future prospects must be made to the notional income while computing the loss of dependency. The compensation awarded was enhanced in the following manner:
|
Sl. No. |
Heads |
Amount (₹) |
|
1. |
Loss of dependency |
8,22,888 |
|
2. |
Loss of love and affection |
30,000 |
|
3. |
Loss of consortium |
1,20,000 |
|
4. |
Loss of estate |
15,000 |
|
5. |
Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses |
15,000 |
|
Total |
10,02,888 |
|
|
Less: Awarded by Tribunal |
7,60,000 |
|
|
Enhanced Compensation |
2,42,888 |
The Court allowing the appeal in part, held that the appellants are entitled to total compensation of ₹10,02,888 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. The Court modified the impugned judgment and award dated 15 May 2019 enhancing the compensation of ₹2,42,888 with interest applicable by the Tribunal.
The Court also directed Respondent 3-Insurance Company to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment, keeping the remaining portion of the impugned award of the Tribunal undisturbed.
[Arasu N. v. Nagappa, 2026 SCC OnLine Kar 2990, decided on 26-2-2026]
*Judgment authored by: Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Pavana B.K., Pratheep K.C. Advocates
For the Respondent: S.V. Hegde Mulkhand, Advocate
