Right to Claim Motor Accident Compensation Survives to Legal Representatives; Supreme Court Enhances Award to Rs.20.37 lakh
A Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice N. V. Anjaria heard an appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in a motor accident claim. The appeal was filed by the original claimant — who had been rendered 100% disabled in a motor accident and subsequently died during the pendency of the appeal — and his legal representatives sought enhancement of the award. The insurance company raised a preliminary objection to the continuation of proceedings by legal representatives, relying on Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act and certain High Court precedents.
The Court allowed the appeal, held that the right to claim compensation for injury in a motor accident survived to the legal representatives after the insertion of sub-section (5) to Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act by Act 32 of 2019, and enhanced the compensation. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: The Court further noted that “when the consideration in the present appeal, is with respect to the loss occasioned to the estate of the injured; the injured having died, the multiplier adopted of 14 cannot be applied which will have to be reduced to 11, the actual life span.”
Background The original claimant had been awarded compensation by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the High Court had modified the award. The claimant, who was certified 100% disabled by a Government Hospital Medical Board, died on April 24, 2024; his legal representatives were substituted. The insurer contested continuation of the appeal, citing Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act and the Madhya Pradesh Full Bench decision in Bhagwati Bai v. Bablu and Mukund and a Single Judge decision of the Allahabad High Court. The insurer relied on a narrow construction that personal injury claims abated on the death of the injured person.
The Court examined the effect of Act 32 of 2019 which inserted sub-section (5) to Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act with effect from April 1, 2022, and held that the statutory amendment conferred a surviving right on legal representatives to claim compensation for injury even if death occurred and even if the cause of death had no nexus with the injury. The Court referred to and applied this position while noting earlier decisions of this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kahlon @ Jasmail Singh Kahlon and Meena (Dead) Rep. by LRs. v. Prayagraj, and recorded a difference of opinion with the Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court but did not dwell on that divergence given the clear applicability of the amended provision.
On quantum, the Tribunal had earlier fixed monthly income at Rs.8,000 but on remand had accepted lower figures; the claimant had no documentary proof of earnings. Applying precedents on appropriate monthly income and reasonable increments, the Court accepted a notional monthly income of Rs.9,000 for the claimant at the time of the accident and allowed 25% for future prospects in view of the claimant’s skilled work and total disability. As the claimant had survived for 11 years after the accident, the Court reduced the multiplier to 11 (actual life span) instead of 14 and computed loss of income as Rs.9,000 x 12 x 125% x 11 = Rs.14,85,000. The tribunal’s award for pain and suffering, attendant and medical expenses of Rs.5,52,095 was retained. The total compensation was fixed at Rs.20,37,095.
The Court directed interest at 9% per annum on the total award from the date of filing of the claim petition until payment; amounts already paid would be deducted and the balance was to be paid within three months. The appeal stood allowed and pending applications were disposed of.
Case Details: Case No.: Civil Appeal No.2159 of 2024 Case Title: Dhannalal Alias Dhanraj (Dead) Thr. LRs. v. Nasir Khan and Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Shail Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Atul Nigam, Advocate