Jharkhand High Court awards compensation under ‘Future Perspective’ for death of 33-year-old housewife in car accident

While increasing the compensation awarded to the family of a 33-year-old woman who died on the spot in a road accident, the Jharkhand High Court has observed that future prospects should be taken into account while assessing her contribution to the household.

Change in compensation awarded by the Road Accident Claims Tribunal from Rs. 3,84,000 to Rs. 5,69,600, the court observed that while determining the amount of compensation, it would be reasonable to add 40% of the income as a future perspective.

Addressing judgments in awarding compensation for future prospects Justice Subhash Chand in their order noticed, “According to the evidence collected, the deceased was 33 years old, and the Court ruled that she was a woman running a household because such a hypothetical income was estimated at 3,000 rupees per month. It is clear from the impugned judgment that the learned Tribunal did not admit anything with respect to the future prospects of the deceased…Therefore, the deceased, who was 33 years old on the day of the accident, was a housewife. Considering that the services she was expected to provide to family members, even if, for the purposes of the discussion, she did not earn any money, when assessing the amount of compensation, it would be appropriate to add 40% of income as a future perspective.”

Court ThuS partially allowed various appeals, moved the relatives of the deceased woman challenging the order passed by the Hazaribagh Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

The case is related to a road accident in which a 33-year-old housewife died on the spot after a bus collided with the jeep she was traveling in. The plaintiffs, members of her family, made an application to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking compensation, alleging that the deceased earned £10,000-11,000 a month from the provision shop. The tribunal, citing a lack of documentary evidence, rejected the claim regarding business earnings and estimated her fictitious income at £3,000 per month.

The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision to estimate the notional income at £3,000 per month, stating: “It is true that no documents were presented on behalf of the plaintiffs confirming that the deceased ran a provision shop. No permit issued by local authorities was presented. “No invoice was issued to the plaintiffs for the purchase of goods from wholesalers for resale at retail price in a grocery store.”

Referring to the amount of compensation, the Court stated that: “assessing the same on the basis of the annual income of the deceased being Rs.36,000/- per annum and 1/3 of the income was deducted to meet his personal expenses which the deceased may have incurred, therefore Rs.24,000/- the annual income was assessed and the learned Court applied a multiplier of 16, and the compensation amount was fixed at Rs.3,84,000/-. Apart from this, an amount of Rs 1,00,000 was awarded as conventional amount for loss of property and Rs 1,00,000 for love and affection and Rs 25,000 for funeral expenses, as such a total compensation of Rs 6,09,000 was awarded.”

The tribunal noted that the deceased, a 33-year-old housewife, had a fictitious income estimated at £3,000 a month. However, the Court did not take into account future prospects in its judgment.

By tightening the amount of compensation, the Court explained that interest at the rate of 6% per annum will apply on the amount increased for the future, from the resolution of the case on July 1, 2013, to the date of awarding the award, and from the date of resolution of the case at the rate of 9% per annum. on an annual basis. from the date of award until actual payment.

Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Appeal was allowed in part, modifying the compensation from ₹ 3,84,000 to ₹ 5,69,600, with stipulated conditions for interest on the increased amount.

Case Title: Tapeshwar Prasad and Ors v. Akashyabat Ray and Ors

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 175

Click here to read the judgment