Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

On 20.6.2008, the appellants filed a claim under Sections 140, 142, 166 read with Rule 3(1) of the MACT Rules before the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal claiming a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- as compensation with interest @ 18% from the date of accident.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal vide its judgment and decree dated 24.07.2009 came to the conclusion that the deceased being a 3rd year engineering student, could have earned Rs. 8,000 per month and deducting 1/3rd of his income for his personal expenses held that the deceased would have contributed Rs. 5,350 per month to the appellants. The Tribunal, on adopting a multiplier of '17' awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,91,400 to the appellants under the head of loss of income and Rs. 10,000 under the head of loss of love and affection.

The Tribunal directed the respondents to jointly or severally deposit the said sum of Rs. 11,00,000 together with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. Respondent no. 1 then approached the High Court. The High Court held that there is a shortcoming in the findings given by the Tribunal regarding the quantum of compensation. The High Court held that the notional income of the deceased is to be taken as Rs. 15,000 per annum, since he was an Engineering student who was studying in the 3rd year. The Court awarded a sum of Rs. 1,27,500/- under the head of loss of income; Rs. 50,000/- each is awarded to each of the claimants under the head of loss of love and affetion, Rs. 10,000 is awarded towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000 is awarded transport expenses and Rs. 4,00,000 is awarded under the head of loss of estate, since the deceased was a 3 rd year Engineering student and after one year, he would get into a highly paid field as an Engineer. In total, the Court awarded a sum of Rs. 6,47,500/- as compensation to the appellants.

Challenging the aforesaid order of the High Court, appellants have preferred the instant appeal submitting that there was no reason to reduce the amount of compensation as awarded by MACT and in fact the appellant had claimed much more than awarded by MACT.

The admitted facts are that the son of the appellant was an Engineering student who was studying in the third year. In these circumstances, treating his notional income at Rs. 15,000/- per annum by the High Court, which comes to Rs. 1250/- per month, we feel that the amount of Rs. 8,000/- per month fixed by MACT was on the lower side. However, at the same time, the Tribunal deducted only one third of his income on the ground that he was still an unmarried person.