Supreme Court: In case of personal injury claim, the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman in the concerned State has to be taken into consideration

 This Court in the case of Kajal (supra) has held that taking notional income is not the correct approach. Instead, the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman in the concerned State has to be taken into consideration because, that would be the minimum amount which she would have earned on becoming a major. In this case, the minimum wage payable to a skilled workman in the State of Delhi at the time of the accident, i.e., 2nd June 2009, was Rs. 4,358/- per month. {Para 29}

 In the Supreme Court of India

(Before B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.)

Baby Sakshi Greola Vs  Manzoor Ahmad Simon and Another 

Civil Appeal No. of 2024 

Decided on December 11, 2024

Citation: 2024 INSC 963,2024 SCC OnLine SC 3692.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Madras HC: Minors are non earning members and hence money should not be deducted towards their personal expenses in motor accident claim petition

 So far as minors are concerned, they are non earning members and there is no occasion for them to spend money towards the personal expenses and there cannot be any deduction towards their personal expenses. In Lata Wadhwa case (cited supra) and Kishan Gopal case (cited supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court after fixing the notional monthly income of the minor applied the multiplier and taken the entire amount as the loss of dependency and no deduction was made for their personal expenses. In the above circumstances, this Court is of the view that there cannot be any deduction towards personal expenses from the notional income of deceased minors.{Para 18}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS

C.M.A. No. 1625 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 11960 of 2020

Decided On: 10.11.2020

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs. H. Mallika Bee and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V. Bharathidasan, J.

Citation:  MANU/TN/6628/2020.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Motor accident claim tribunal can exhibit medicine bill even if name of the patient was not written on the bill

One must remember that amongst people who were not Government employees and belong to the poorer strata of society, bills were not retained. Some of the bills had been excluded by the courts below only on the ground that the name of the patient was not written on the bill. There was no dispute with regard to the long period of treatment and hospitalisation of this young girl. Immediately after the accident, she was admitted at a hospital. From there, she was referred to the other hospital, where she remained admitted and, thereafter, she was again admitted in the hospital. She was in the hospital for almost fifty one days, and both doctor had supported this. Limiting the amount only to the bills which have been paid in the name of the claimant only, would not be reasonable.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 735 of 2020.

Decided On: 05.02.2020

Kajal Vs. Jagdish Chand and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ.

Author: Deepak Gupta, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0126/2020,(2020) 4 SCC 413.

Print Page

Supreme Court: The court should grant compensation on notional income for future prospects on account of death of homemaker

 Once notional income has been determined, the question remains as to whether escalation for future prospects should be granted with regard to it. Initially, the awarding of future prospects by this Court was related to the stability of the job held by the victim. {Para 37}

38. However, there was a shift in jurisprudence regarding future prospects with the five-Judge Bench decision of this Court in Pranay Sethi (supra). This Court extended the benefit regarding future prospects to even self-employed persons, or those on a fixed salary. The Court held as follows:

57. Having bestowed our anxious consideration, we are disposed to think when we accept the principle of standardisation, there is really no rationale not to apply the said principle to the self-employed or a person who is on a fixed salary. To follow the doctrine of actual income at the time of death and not to add any amount with regard to future prospects to the income for the purpose of determination of multiplicand would be unjust. The determination of income while computing compensation has to include future prospects so that the method will come within the ambit and sweep of just compensation as postulated Under Section 168 of the Act. In case of a deceased who had held a permanent job with inbuilt grant of annual increment, there is an acceptable certainty. But to state that the legal representatives of a deceased who was on a fixed salary would not be entitled to the benefit of future prospects for the purpose of computation of compensation would be inapposite. It is because the criterion of distinction between the two in that event would be certainty on the one hand and staticness on the other. One may perceive that the comparative measure is certainty on the one hand and uncertainty on the other but such a perception is fallacious. It is because the price rise does affect a self-employed person; and that apart there is always an incessant effort to enhance one's income for sustenance. The purchasing capacity of a salaried person on permanent job when increases because of grant of increments and pay revision or for some other change in service conditions, there is always a competing attitude in the private sector to enhance the salary to get better efficiency from the employees. Similarly, a person who is self-employed is bound to garner his resources and raise his charges/fees so that he can live with same facilities....Taking into consideration the cumulative factors, namely, passage of time, the changing society, escalation of price, the change in price index, the human attitude to follow a particular pattern of life, etc., an addition of 40% of the established income of the deceased towards future prospects and where the deceased was below 40 years an addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years would be reasonable.

(emphasis supplied)

39. The rationale behind the awarding of future prospects is therefore no longer merely about the type of profession, whether permanent or otherwise, although the percentage awarded is still dependent on the same. The awarding of future prospects is now a part of the duty of the Court to grant just compensation, taking into account the realities of life, particularly of inflation, the quest of individuals to better their circumstances and those of their loved ones, rising wage rates and the impact of experience on the quality of work.

41. When it comes to the second category of cases, relating to notional income for non-earning victims, it is my opinion that the above principle applies with equal vigor, particularly with respect to homemakers. Once notional income is determined, the effects of inflation would equally apply. Further, no one would ever say that the improvements in skills that come with experience do not take place in the domain of work within the household. It is worth noting that, although not extensively discussed, this Court has been granting future prospects even in cases pertaining to notional income, as has been highlighted by my learned brother, Surya Kant, J., in his opinion [Hem Raj v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited,   MANU/SC/1799/2017 : (2018) 15 SCC 654; Sunita Tokas v. New India Insurance Co. Ltd.,   MANU/SC/1105/2019 : (2019) 20 SCC 688].

 The granting of future prospects, on the notional income calculated in such cases, is a component of just compensation.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 19-20 of 2021 

Decided On: 05.01.2021

Kirti and Ors. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Surya Kant, S. Abdul Nazeer and N.V. Ramana, JJ.

Authored By : Surya Kant, N.V. Ramana

Surya Kant, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/0004/2021.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme court explains different theories for ascertaining the value of a homemaker's unpaid labour for grant of compensation under motor vehicles Act

The Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act gives a value to the compensation payable in respect of those who had no income prior to the accident and for a spouse, it says that one-third of the income of the earning surviving spouse should be the value. Exploration on the internet shows that there have been efforts to understand the value of a homemaker's unpaid labour by different methods. One is, the opportunity cost which evaluates her wages by assessing what she would have earned had she not remained at home, viz., the opportunity lost. The second is, the partnership method which assumes that a marriage is an equal economic partnership and in this method, the homemaker's salary is valued at half her husband's salary. Yet another method is to evaluate homemaking by determining how much it would cost to replace the homemaker with paid workers. This is called the Replacement Method. {Para 10}

(emphasis supplied)

35. However, it must be remembered that all the above methods are merely suggestions. There can be no exact calculation or formula that can magically ascertain the true value provided by an individual gratuitously for those that they are near and dear to. The attempt of the Court in such matters should therefore be towards determining, in the best manner possible, the truest approximation of the value added by a homemaker for the purpose of granting monetary compensation.

36. Whichever method a Court ultimately chooses to value the activities of a homemaker, would ultimately depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. The Court needs to keep in mind its duty to award just compensation, neither assessing the same conservatively, nor so liberally as to make it a bounty to claimants [National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pranay Sethi,   MANU/SC/1366/2017 : (2017) 16 SCC 680; Kajal v. Jagdish Chand,   MANU/SC/0126/2020 : (2020) 4 SCC 413].

42. Therefore, on the basis of the above, certain general observations can be made regarding the issue of calculation of notional income for homemakers and the grant of future prospects with respect to them, for the purposes of grant of compensation which can be summarized as follows:

a. Grant of compensation, on a pecuniary basis, with respect to a homemaker, is a settled proposition of law.

b. Taking into account the gendered nature of housework, with an overwhelming percentage of women being engaged in the same as compared to men, the fixing of notional income of a homemaker attains special significance. It becomes a recognition of the work, labour and sacrifices of homemakers and a reflection of changing attitudes. It is also in furtherance of our nation's international law obligations and our constitutional vision of social equality and ensuring dignity to all.

c. Various methods can be employed by the Court to fix the notional income of a homemaker, depending on the facts and circumstances of the case.

d. The Court should ensure while choosing the method, and fixing the notional income, that the same is just in the facts and circumstances of the particular case, neither assessing the compensation too conservatively, nor too liberally.

e. The granting of future prospects, on the notional income calculated in such cases, is a component of just compensation.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 19-20 of 2021 

Decided On: 05.01.2021

Kirti and Ors. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Surya Kant, S. Abdul Nazeer and N.V. Ramana, JJ.

Authored By : Surya Kant, N.V. Ramana

Surya Kant, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/0004/2021.

Print Page

Supreme court judgment laying down notional income in case of child death in motor accident as Rs 30,000/- or Rs 25000/-

 In view of the foregoing decisions, it is apparent that in the cases of child death, the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- as specified in the IInd Schedule of M.V. Act has been enhanced on account of devaluation of money and value of rupee coming down from the date on which the IInd Schedule of M.V. Act was introduced and the said notional income was treated as Rs. 30,000/- in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and Rs. 25,000/- in Kurvan Ansari (supra) in age group of 10 and 7 years respectively. {Para 12}

13. Thus applying the ratio of the said judgments, looking to the age of the child in the present case i.e. 12 years, the principles laid down in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) are aptly applicable to the facts of the present case. As per the ocular statement of the mother of the deceased, it is clear that deceased was a brilliant student and studying in a private school. Therefore, accepting the notional earning Rs. 30,000/- including future prospect and applying the multiplier of 15 in view of the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma (supra), the loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,50,000/- and if we add Rs. 50,000/- in conventional heads, then the total sum of compensation comes to Rs. 5,00,000/-.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 7255 of 2022 

Decided On: 13.10.2022

Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Chand Mahto and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Sanjiv Khanna and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ.

Author: J.K. Maheshwari, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/1320/2022,(2023) 1 SCC 204.

Print Page

How to assess income of deceased in motor accident claim petition if his salary certificate is not available?

It is the specific case of the claimants that the deceased was possessing heavy vehicle driving licence and was earning Rs.15000/­ per month. Possessing such licence and driving of heavy vehicle on the date of accident is proved from the evidence on record. Though the wife of the deceased has categorically deposed as AW­1 that her husband Shivpal was earning Rs.15000/­ per month, same was not considered only on the ground that salary certificate was not filed. The Tribunal has fixed the monthly income of the deceased by adopting minimum wage notified for the skilled labour in the year 2016. In absence of salary certificate the minimum wage notification can be a yardstick but at the same time cannot be an absolute one to fix the income of the deceased. In absence of documentary evidence on record some amount of guesswork is required to be done. But at the same time the guesswork for assessing the income of the deceased should not be totally detached from reality. Merely because claimants were unable to produce documentary evidence to show the monthly income of Shivpal, same does not justify adoption of lowest tier of minimum wage while computing the income. There is no reason to discard the oral evidence of the wife of the deceased who has deposed that late Shivpal was earning around Rs.15000/­ per month. {Para 10}

                              Supreme Court

JUSTICE R. Subhash Reddy JUSTICE Hrishikesh Roy

Chandra @ Chanda @ Chandraram & Anr. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Yadav & Ors.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6152 OF 2021

1st October 2021

Author: R. Subhash Reddy, J.

Citation:  2021 ALL SCR 2196,(2022) 1 SCC 198.

Print Page

Whether court can grant interim maintenance to wife under DV Act on basis of notional income of husband?

The petitioner claims that he is non-matriculate and has no source of income, he having been engaged in earning his livelihood as a driver of three wheeler scooter (TSR) till 2006, cannot be acted upon. He has not disclosed as to how he has been surviving all along. It cannot be believed that a person who was capable of supporting a family by getting married and raising a child would all of a sudden become devoid of all sources of income.

6. It is clear and is evident from the order of the sessions that the petitioner is concealing facts, intentionally withholding information about his income. It is noted that the Metropolitan Magistrate faced with a situation wherein respondents were also unable to muster clear proof, has assumed the income notionally on the basis of minimum wages and on such basis has passed the order of interim maintenance. The approach of the Metropolitan Magistrate in these circumstances cannot be faulted.

In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

(Before R.K. Gauba, J.)

Khem Chand  v. Bhagwati alias Laxmi

Crl. M.C. 812/2016 & Crl.M.A. 3423/2016

Decided on January 22, 2019

Citation: 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6776

Print Page