Supreme Court of India
ANITA DEVI AND ORS.versusSATYENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND ORS.
- Citation
- 2008 INSC 800
- Decided
- 10 July 2008
- Disposal
- Case Allowed
- Bench
- ARIJIT PASAYAT
Holding
The Supreme Court set aside the MACT award (as affirmed by the High Court) and remitted the case to the MACT to recompute compensation taking into account the documents on record concerning the deceased's income.
Summary
The deceased, Pramod Kumar, died in a vehicular accident and his dependants filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded compensation based on a notional annual income of Rs.15,000, citing lack of concrete evidence of the deceased's earnings, and the High Court affirmed this award. The claimants appealed, asserting that they had submitted several documents to establish the deceased's actual income, which were not considered by either the MACT or the High Court. The Supreme Court examined the original MACT records, found that while tax returns were absent, the submitted documents could illuminate the income issue, and therefore set aside the award. The matter was remitted to the MACT to recompute compensation taking those documents into account. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the MACT and the High Court erred in relying on a notional income figure without considering the documents filed by the claimants to establish the deceased's actual income.
- Whether the compensation award under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act should be set aside and remitted for fresh determination of income.
Legislation cited
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988s. 166, s. 173(1)
Subjects
Motor Vehicles ActSection 166CompensationFatal accidentNotional incomeMACTIncome assessmentSupreme CourtAppealRemand
Judgment
[2008] 10 S.C.R. 664
'1
A ANITA DEVI AND ORS.
V.
SATYENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.4291 of 2008)
B
JULY 10, 2008 .i.-
-
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s. 166 - Fatal accident -
Claim for compensation by dependants of the deceased -
c MACT came upon a finding that there was no concrete mate-
rial regarding income of the deceased and awarded compen-
sation by taking notional income of the deceased at Rs. 15, 0001
- p.a -Affirmed by High Court- Plea of claimants that several
·documents were filed to establish the income of deceased
which were not consid~red by MACT or High Court - Held:
D r
Records of MACT show that certain documents were filed which
may throw light on the income aspect - Matter remitted to
MACT with direction to consider the matter relating to income
of the deceased and determine compensation afresh taking
into account the documents already on record.
E
A petition for compensation in terms of s.166 of the-
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by dependants of a
person who died in a vehicular accident. The Motor Acci-
dents Claims Tribunal (MACT) came upon a finding that
F there was no concrete material regarding income of the -~
deceased and awarded compensation to the claimants
by taking notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/-
p.a. The award was affirmed by the High Court.
Before this Court, the appellants-claimants con-
G tended thaf several documents were filed to establish the
income of the deceased and this aspect was not taken
note of, either by the MACT or by the High Cour.t.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
H 664
ANITA DEVI & ORS. v. SATYENDRA NARAIN 665
SINGH & ORS. [DR ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
" HELD:1.1 To test the correctness of the stand of the A
appellants that several documents were filed to establish
the income of the deceased, the original records from
MACT were called for. It appears from the records that cer-
(ain documents have been filed. It is true that there are no
~ -,, copies of the income tax return or the assessment order. B
But the documents on record can certainly throw light on
the income aspect. [Para 6] [666-G-H; 667-A]
1.2. The award of the MACT as affirmed by the High
Court is set aside and the matter is remitted to MACT to
consider the matter relating to income of the deceased and c
determine the compensation afresh taking into account the
documents already on record. [Para 7] [667-A & B]
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4291
of 2008
D
--I
From the final Judgment and Order dated 9.7.2004 of the
High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in M.A. No. 155/2003
Deba Prasad Mukherjee, Arvind Kr. Lall and Nandini Sen
for the Appellants.
E
A.K. Raina and Dr. Kailash Chand for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted.
> 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a F
Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi dismiss-
ing the Miscellaneous application filed by the appellants under
Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the
'Act').
G
3. Case of the appellants, in a nutshell, is as follows:
\.
Pramod Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased')
died in a vehicular accident in which Maruti.Van bearing regis-
tration No.ER-14P-4320 was involved. The Maruti Van was be-
ing driven by respondent No.1 rashly and negligently. Initially, H
666 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2008] 10 S.C.R.
'(
A Pramod Kumar had sustained grievous injuries. He was first
taken to the GovernmentHospital from which he was referred
to Bokaro General Hospital where he had expired on 18.4.2000.
The deceased was 37 years of age. The petition for compen-
sation in terms of Section 166 of the Act was filed by the
B dependants of the deceased. The Motor Accidents Claims Tri- 'Ir ....
bunal (in short the 'MACT') on consideration of the materials
placed before it held that claimants are entitled to compensa-
tion of Rs.1,39,808/-. Since the vehicle was the subject matter
of insurance, the Orients! Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred
c to as the 'insurer') was held liable for the compensation amount
to the claimants alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the
date of filing of the application. It was.found that there is no con-
crete material regardiflg the income of the deceased. How:..
ever, it was held that notional income of Rs.15,000/- p.a. can be
taken after deducting certain amounts for personal use. The
D
contribution was fixed at Rs.10,216/- p.a. The multiplier of 13 ~
was applied and Rs.5,000/- was also granted for loss of expec-
tation of life and Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses. An appeal
•
was preferred by the claimants questioning correctness of the
award, taking the stand that the quantum fixed was very low.
.,r
E High Court dismissed the appeal holding that there was no evi-
dence of earning income.
I
4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appel-.
lant submitted that several documents were filed to establish
F the income of the deceased. This aspect was not taken note of
.(_
either by the MACT or the High Court.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the
appellants did not produce any definite material regarding in-
come and the MACT was justified in taking the notional income.
G
6. To test the correctness of the stand of the appellants
that several documents were filed to establish Jhe income of
the deceased, the original records from MACT were called for.
It appears from the records that certain documents have been
filed. It is true that there are no copies of the income tax return
H
ANITA DEVI & ORS. v. SATYENDRA NARAIN 667
SINGH & ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
or 'the assessment order. But the documents on record can cer- A
tainly throw light on the income aspect.
7. Above being the position, we set aside the award of the
MACT as affirmed by the High Court and remit the matter to
-. MACT to consider the matter relating to income of the deceased
and determine the compensation afresh taking into account the
documents already on record.
B
8. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid extent with no
order as to costs.
B.B.B . Appeal allowed.
•
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Motor Vehicles Act"Sign in to search