Supreme Court: Air Force Group Insurance Society qualifies as ‘State’ under Article 12  ||  SC: Anganwadi Workers With Degrees Are Eligible For The 29% Quota For Supervisors in Kerala  ||  SC: Giving Accused the Option of Search Before a Police Officer Breaches Section 50 of the NDPS Act  ||  Gujarat HC: Person is Entitled to Compensation For Injury or Death Within Railway Station Premises  ||  Delhi HC: PMLA Can Apply Even if the Scheduled Offence Occurred Before the Law Came Into Force  ||  J&K&L HC: Accused Can Admit Evidence Recorded under Section 299 Crpc After Appearing in Court  ||  J&K&L HC: District Judge Serving as Reference Court under Land Acquisition Act Acts as a Civil Court  ||  Del HC: Subsequent Bail Pleas From Same FIR Should Usually Go Before the Judge Who Denied the First  ||  J&K&L HC: Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Despite Statutory Status, is Not a ‘State’ under Article 12  ||  SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation    

Shiv Kumar & Ors. vs. Gainda Lal & Ors. - (Supreme Court) (21 Oct 2022)

While considering the loss of dependency, 40% of the income is required to be added towards future prospects

MANU/SC/1377/2022

Motor Vehicles

The original claimants have preferred the present appeal to enhance the amount of compensation feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court.

The Appellants ¬original claimants has vehemently submitted that, the High Court has committed a serious error in awarding the loss of dependency considering the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000¬ per month only. It is submitted that even the minimum wages payable to the skilled worker was much more than Rs.6,000¬ per month. It is submitted that even otherwise while awarding the loss of dependency, future prospect has not been taken into consideration at all.

At the relevant time, the deceased was a housewife aged 25 years only and there was contribution of the wife in the family and there is evidence that she was also doing the tuition work, present Court is of the opinion that, the High Court ought to have considered the income of the deceased at least Rs.7,500¬ per month. The High Court has also not considered the future prospects. As per the settled position of law while considering the loss of dependency 40% of the income is required to be added towards future prospects.

The claimants shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh each instead of Rs.50,000¬ as awarded by the High Court for loss of foetus. The claimants – husband and the minor son shall also be entitled to Rs.40,000¬ each towards loss of consortium or loss of love and affection. To the aforesaid extent, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is required to be modified.

The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is modified and it is directed that the appellants original claimants shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs.32,82,000¬ with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Present appeal is accordingly allowed.

Tags : COMPENSATION   ENHANCEMENT   ELIGIBILITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved