In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has nearly doubled the compensation awarded to the grieving parents of a man who died in a road accident nearly a decade ago. The court enhanced the payout from approximately Rs 13.52 lakh to over Rs 24.16 lakh, marking an increase of more than Rs 10.64 lakh.
Court Revises Decade-Old Tribunal Award
The case pertains to the tragic death of Bhupender, also known as Vicky, who lost his life in a motor vehicle accident on June 11, 2016. His parents had been fighting a legal battle since 2018, when the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Hisar awarded them Rs 13,52,022. They appealed, arguing that the tribunal had grossly underestimated their son's income and misapplied several legal principles governing compensation.
The MACT had treated the 30-year-old deceased as an unskilled worker, fixing his notional monthly income at Rs 9,258. His parents contended that he was a qualified electrician from ITI Hisar and was earning around Rs 50,000 per month. While they could not produce documentary proof of his income, Justice Harkesh Manuja, in his judgment pronounced on a recent Thursday, relied on Supreme Court guidelines to arrive at a more realistic assessment.
Realistic Income Assessment Based on Qualification
Justice Manuja observed, "Considering the facts of the present case, it is a matter of common knowledge that a person working as an electrician who had acquired his requisite technical qualification from ITI, Hisar would have a reasonable and steady source of income, sufficient to maintain himself and contribute to his family."
Citing precedents like Kubra Bibi vs Oriental Insurance Co Ltd (2023) and Chandra @ Chanda @ Chandraram vs Mukesh Kumar Yadav & Ors (2022), the judge fixed the deceased's notional monthly income at Rs 12,000 (calculated as Rs 400 per day for 30 days).
Revised Calculation and Special Considerations
The court then applied a 40% addition for future prospects, considering his age and potential career growth. A critical departure from the usual practice was made in calculating personal expenses. Typically, a 50% deduction is applied for a bachelor's personal expenses. However, noting the special circumstances, the court applied a one-third deduction.
The judgment highlighted, "In the given case, it has come on record that the deceased was survived by aged parents. Evidently, being the sole earning member of the family, the deceased was under moral and social obligation to contribute some amount towards the maintenance of his aged parents… the deduction is assessed at one-third (1/3rd) of the income."
The court used a multiplier of 17, corresponding to the deceased's age of 30 years, to calculate the loss of dependency. This resulted in a figure of Rs 22,84,800 under this head.
Enhanced Conventional Heads and Interest
Additional amounts under conventional heads were also revised upwards. The parents were awarded:
- Rs 18,000 for funeral expenses.
- Rs 18,000 for loss of estate.
- Rs 96,000 (Rs 48,000 each) for loss of filial consortium.
Adding these to the loss of dependency, the total compensation amounted to Rs 24,16,800.
The court retained the interest rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the original claim petition. It further directed that if the insurance company fails to pay the enhanced amount within three months, it shall attract a higher interest rate of 12% per annum thereafter.
Insurance Company's Stance and Court's Final Order
The insurance company involved in the case did not contest its liability or the question of negligence leading to the accident. However, it argued that the tribunal's original award was adequate and required no interference. The High Court, after examining the merits, found substance in the parents' appeal and proceeded to enhance the compensation.
The appeal was finally disposed of with these modifications, bringing a measure of financial solace to the parents after a long legal journey. This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring compensation is not just symbolic but realistic and commensurate with the loss, especially when the deceased was the primary support for aged dependents.
