CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.19856 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.31405 of 2016)

LAXMIDHAR NAYAK AND ORS.                 …Appellants

Versus

JUGAL KISHORE BEHERA AND ORS.             ...Respondents

J U D G M E N T

R. BANUMATHI, J.

Leave granted.

2. Appellants  who are  the sons and daughter  of  the deceased

Chanchali  Nayak  have  filed  this  appeal  seeking  enhancement  of

compensation for the death of their mother in the road accident on

29.09.1991 as against compensation of Rs.70,600/- awarded by the

tribunal and affirmed by the High Court of Orissa.  

3. Mother  of  appellants-Chanchali  Nayak  was  working  as  an

agricultural labourer.  On the date of accident - 29.09.1991 at about

8.00 a.m., Chanchali Nayak was proceeding on the left side of the

1

CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

road  alongwith  some  other  labourers.  At  that  time,  due  to

head-on-collision between two vehicles-bus (bearing No.OSF 5157)

and truck (bearing No.OAC 495), the bus swerved to the extreme left

side of the road and ran over Chanchali Nayak and she succumbed

to injuries.  In the claim petition filed by the claimants, the tribunal

held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of both

the vehicles.   

4. So far as the compensation is concerned, the tribunal has taken

the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.650/- per month and after

deducting  an amount  of  Rs.250/-  towards  her  personal  expenses,

assessed  the  contribution  to  the  family  at  Rs.400/-  per  month.

Deceased was aged 42 years and the tribunal adopted multiplier of

"12"  and  awarded  compensation  of  Rs.57,600/-  for  the  loss  of

dependency and adding conventional damages, tribunal has awarded

total compensation of Rs.70,600/-.   The respondents No.1 and 2 -

owners  of  the  bus  and  the  truck  were  held  liable  to  pay  the

compensation to the claimants at 50% each alongwith interest at the

rate  of  9% per  annum.   Pointing out  that  the claimants  have  not

produced the insurance policies of the vehicles, the tribunal held that

2

CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the compensation.

However, it  is  seen from the judgment  of  the High Court  that  the

insurance company has been satisfied with the award.  On appeal to

the High Court by the claimants, the High Court affirmed the quantum

of compensation of Rs.70,600/- awarded to the claimants but reduced

the rate  of  interest  from 9% to  7%.  So far  as  the liability  of  the

insurance  company  is  concerned,  the  High  Court  held  that  the

insurance company-respondent No.3 having paid the compensation

to the claimants cannot  avoid its  liability  to  pay the compensation

amount.  Being dissatisfied with the quantum of  compensation,  the

appellants have filed this appeal.  

5. We  have  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the  appellants.

Respondent No.2 and insurance company-respondent No.3 have not

entered their appearance.  We have perused the impugned judgment

and the materials placed on record.

6. PW-1 in his evidence stated that Chanchali Nayak was earning

Rs.35/-  per  day  as  wages  out  of  the  labour  work.  Deceased

Chanchali Nayak was an agricultural labourer.  The tribunal has taken

her income at the rate of Rs.25/- per day and assessed the monthly

3

CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

income at Rs.650/- per month.  It is quite improbable that a labourer

would be available for such a small amount of Rs.25/- per day. The

wages fixed by the tribunal for the daily labourer at Rs.25/- per day

and the monthly income at Rs.650/- is too low.  The reasoning of the

tribunal  that  a lady labourer  may not  get  engagement  daily  is  not

acceptable.  Even  though  works  like  cutting  of  paddy  and  other

agricultural labour may not be available on all days throughout the

year, in rural areas other kinds of work are available for a labourer.

Deceased Chanchali Nayak even though was said to be earning only

Rs.35/- per day at that time, over the years, she would have earned

more.  In our view, deceased Chanchali Nayak, being a woman and

mother of three children,  would have also contributed her physical

labour  for  maintenance  of  household  and  also  taking  care  of  her

children. The High Court as well as the tribunal did not keep in view

the  contribution  of  the  deceased  in  the  household  work,  being  a

labourer and also maintaining her husband, her daily income should

be fixed at Rs.150/- per day and Rs.4,500/- per month.    

7. Taking income from the agricultural labour work at Rs.3,000/-

per  month and Rs.1,500/-  per  month  for  the household  work,  the

4

CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

monthly  income of  the deceased is  fixed at  Rs.4,500/-  per  month

deducting  1/3rd for  personal  expenses,  contribution  of  deceased

towards  the  family  is  calculated  at  Rs.3,000/-  per  month  and

Rs.36,000/-  per  annum. Deceased Chanchali  Nayak was aged 42

years. As per the second schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,

for the age groups 40-45 years multiplier is "15".  As per Sarla Verma

(Smt.) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another (2009)

6 SCC 121, for the age groups 41-45 years multiplier to be adopted is

"14". Therefore, the multiplier of "12" adopted by the tribunal and the

High Court may not be correct.  Hence, the multiplier of "12" adopted

may  not  be  correct.   Adopting  the  multiplier  of  "14"  loss  of

dependency is calculated at Rs.5,04,000/- (3,000x12x14).

8. As  per  the  decision  of  the  Constitution  Bench  in  National

Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others  2017 (13)

SCALE  12,  compensation  of  Rs.15,000/-  for  loss  of  estate  and

Rs.15,000/-  for  funeral  expenses  is  awarded.  Thus  total

compensation awarded to the claimants is enhanced to Rs.5,34,000/-

payable with interest at the rate of 7% per annum.

5

CIVIL APPEAL NO...........OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.31405/2016

9. The  impugned  judgment  is  modified  and  the  compensation

payable to the claimants is enhanced to Rs.5,34,000/-. The enhanced

compensation is payable with interest at the rate of 7% per annum

from 27.01.2016 (the date of judgment of the High Court) and this

appeal  is  partly  allowed.  Respondents  No.1  to  3  are  jointly  and

severally liable to pay the enhanced compensation with interest.  

...……………………….J.     [RANJAN GOGOI]  

                            ..………………………..J.  [R. BANUMATHI]

New Delhi; November 28, 2017

6