Can a change of multiplier be granted in a motor accident claim for a wrongly recorded age?
Motor Accident Claims — Compensation — Multiplier — Age of deceased wrongly recorded — Future prospects —
Motor Accident Claims — Multiplier — Age wrongly recorded as 60 — Found 50 on scientific evidence —
Held: Because the deceased's age, wrongly recorded as 60, was found to be 50 on scientific evidence, the High Court correctly granted a change of multiplier to thirteen and awarded future prospects, so the order needs no interference and the appeal is dismissed. (¶3, 4, 5)
Can a change of multiplier be granted in a motor accident claim for a wrongly recorded age?
Yes. The age of 60 recorded for the deceased was wrong and was found to be 50 on scientific evidence, so the High Court correctly granted a multiplier of thirteen and future prospects, and this Court saw no need to interfere. [¶3, ¶4, ¶5]
Prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment.
“This appeal is of the claimants, which arises out of the Impugned Judgment dated 26.09.2018 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in an appeal against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, the “Tribunal”) dated 13.05.2013.”
“The matter was taken in appeal by the High Court which after considering the submissions of the Ram Kishan and respondent no.3 awarded them increased compensation on the opinion that the multiplier should have been thirteen instead of nine and the Tribunal was wrong in not granting any amount towards the future prospects.”
“Therefore, the High Court increased the compensation awarded to Rs. 6,55,000/- with the amount to be given at the 7.5 % interest. The change of multiplier was granted by the High Court as the age of the deceased was wrongly recorded as 60 and was found to be 50 years, based on scientific evidence. The High Court has also increased the rate of interest from 7% to 7.5%.”
“The High Court has correctly awarded the compensation and the order of the High Court needs no interference by this Court. Hence this appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.”
Headnote & Points of Law
You've used your free headnotes this month
The Court's judgment is below in full, free, as always — that never changes. What needs an account is LexStreak's own work on it: the headnote, the questions this judgment settles, and the passages that decide them. A free account opens all of it again.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India
This appeal is of the claimants, which arises out of the Impugned Judgment dated 26.09.2018 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in an appeal against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, the “Tribunal”) dated 13.05.2013.
The accident occurred on 22.11.2010 when the deceased Hari Ram was riding on a three-wheeler with his brother Dev Prasad from Mitrol to Palwal, Haryana. The vehicle was being driven by respondent no. 1, i.e., Ram Kishan and was insured with respondent no. 3 (IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company LTD.). During the journey an accident occurred and the vehicle was toppled which resulted in grievous injuries to the body of Hari Ram. He was taken to the hospital but he succumbed to his injuries on the very next day on 23.11.2010. The claim petition was filed on his behalf by his wife, his son and his mother. The Tribunal was of the opinion that the accident did occur due to the rash and negligent driving by driver of the three-wheeler. The vehicle was insured with respondent no.3 insurance company and the liability was fixed on the insurance company by the Tribunal. The award was made on the following: - A Expenses incurred on the treatment of deceased during admission Rs.13,000/- B Monthly income of the deceased Hari Ram Rs.5,000/- C After deducting 1/4th from the monthly income of Rs.5000/- in view dependency of deceased, the amount comes to, Rs.3,750/- D Annual Income of the deceased 12= comes to Rs.3,750/- x Rs.45,000/- E Multiplier of ‘9’ is to be applied x 9 = Applied keeping in view the age of the deceased as 60 years as per Sarla Verma’s case Rs.45,000/- Rs.4,05,000/- F Compensation on account of last rites and transportation charges Rs.5,000/- G Compensation towards loss of estate Rs.5,000/- H Compensation towards loss of consortium Rs.5,000/- The total amount of compensation Rs.4,33,000/-
The matter was taken in appeal by the High Court which after considering the submissions of the Ram Kishan and respondent no.3 awarded them increased compensation on the opinion that the multiplier should have been thirteen instead of nine and the Tribunal was wrong in not granting any amount towards the future prospects.
Therefore, the High Court increased the compensation awarded to Rs. 6,55,000/- with the amount to be given at the 7.5 % interest. The change of multiplier was granted by the High Court as the age of the deceased was wrongly recorded as 60 and was found to be 50 years, based on scientific evidence. The High Court has also increased the rate of interest from 7% to 7.5%.
The High Court has correctly awarded the compensation and the order of the High Court needs no interference by this Court. Hence this appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ……..............................J. [HEMANT GUPTA] .….............................J. [SUDHANSHU DHULIA] New Delhi, October 14, 2022.
Is non-payment of a part of the sale price a ground for cancellation of a registered Sale Deed once title has passed?
2020 INSC 450 · Supreme Court of India
Does the burden to prove that property is joint property of a Hindu Undivided Family lie on the person who alleges it?
2020 INSC 327 · Supreme Court of India
Can a confession statement be used to frame charges against an accused in the absence of any other evidence?
CRL RC.2194/2023 · Madras High Court
The Supreme Court and the Madras High Court decide something every day. Read one a day.
A free account gets you the day's judgments in your practice areas, a reading streak, and folders to keep what matters.
Start reading freeOne judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
LexStreak turns the Supreme Court's and the Madras High Court's output into a five-minute daily read for advocates — plain-language headnotes, the questions each judgment settles, and the full text when you need it.
Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India
Headnote and questions prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk · Report an error · Privacy