SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation  ||  Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case  ||  Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights  ||  Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims  ||  Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation  ||  Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity  ||  Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper  ||  Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration  ||  Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal  ||  Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status    

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