High CourtDivision BenchPartly allowed

Laxmidhar Nayak and Ors. v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Ors.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Appeal No. 19856 of 2017
Neutral Citation:(2017) 11 SCR 242

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court
Hon'ble Judges
  • Ranjan Gogoi
  • R. Banumath i
Judgment Date
2017-11-28
Court Decision / Holding
Appeal partly allowed. The impugned judgment is modified; the compensation is enhanced to Rs. 5,34,000 with interest at 7% per annum from 27.01.2016. Respondents Nos. 1–3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the enhanced compensation with interest.
Final Disposition
Partly allowed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Laxmidhar Nayak and Ors.

Respondents

  • Jugal Kishore Behera and Ors.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Chattamnjan Misra
  • • Bhanu Pratap Singh
  • • D. P. Singh Yadav
  • • Binay B Kumar Das

Case Synopsis & Summary

On 29 September 1991, Chanchali Nayak, an agricultural labourer and mother of three, died in a head-on collision between a bus and a truck. The Tribunal assessed her monthly income at Rs 650 (Rs 25 per day) after deducting Rs 250 for personal expenses, and awarded Rs 70,600 as compensation. The High Court affirmed but reduced interest from 9% to 7%. The appellants, sons and daughter of the deceased, challenged, arguing that the tribunal’s wage figure was unrealistically low and that the deceased’s domestic and child-care contributions should be factored into earnings. They contended that, as a woman and head of a rural household, she would have earned more over the years and contributed to maintenance, not merely as a daily labourer. The Supreme Court agreed, noting that the wage of Rs 25 per day is improbable and that other rural work would be available. It fixed the daily income at Rs 150 and monthly income at Rs 4,500, and, after a one-third personal deduction, calculated family contribution at Rs 3,000 per month (Rs 36,000 per year). For a 42-year-old deceased, the Court applied a multiplier of 14 (per Sarla Verma) instead of 12, yielding loss of dependency of Rs 5,04,000. It added Rs 15,000 for loss of estate and Rs 15,000 for funeral expenses, total Rs 5,34,000, with 7% interest from 27.01.2016. The appeal was partly allowed.

Provisions of Law Cited

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Multiplier method for calculating dependency loss (Sarla Verma rule)
  • Compensation heads: loss of estate and funeral expenses
  • Pranay Sethi guidelines (National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi) for awarding compensation under non-pecuniary heads

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellants contended that the tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s wages at Rs. 25 per day (Rs. 650 per month) is unrealistically low for a rural agricultural labourer who would also contribute to household maintenance and child care. They argued for applying the multiplier appropriate to the deceased’s age (41–45 years), i.e., 14 (per Sarla Verma), rather than the tribunal/High Court’s 12, and for including the deceased’s domestic contributions to family income. Based on Rs. 3,000 per month contributed from earnings (after deducting one-third for personal expenses) and applying the higher multiplier, the loss of dependency increases significantly. They relied on Sarla Verma and the Pranay Sethi framework for calculating heads of compensation (loss of estate and funeral expenses) to arrive at a total enhanced amount of Rs. 5,34,000 with 7% interest. respondents:The respondents did not file a detailed counter-argument in the judgment; there was no appearance by Respondents No. 2 and 3 at the hearing, and the insurers’ liability was addressed through the court’s remedial order rather than contested on merit in the present hearing.

Contentions of Respondents

Respondents did not file a detailed counter-argument; Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 did not appear; the dispute centered on the calculation of compensation and multiplier rather than a contested liability framework.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr.(2009) 6 SCC 121; [2009] 5 SCR 1098PositiveUsed to apply the multiplier for the deceased’s age group (41–45 years), leading to a higher loss of dependency (14 rather than 12).
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors.2017 (13) SCALE 12PositiveConstitution Bench guidance for heads of compensation (e.g., loss of estate and funeral expenses) and updated framework for tribunals to apply in motor vehicle accident cases.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Laxmidhar Nayak and Ors. v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Ors. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# [2017) l 1 S.C.R. 242 A # LAXMIDHAR NAYAK AND ORS. v. JU GAL KISH ORE BEHERA AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. l 9X56 of 2017) B NOVEMBER 28, 20 l 7 ## **[RANJAN GOGOi AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.J** c D E F G _Motor Vehicles Act, 1988- Rash a11d negligent driving- Fatal accident_ - _Head-on collision between bus and truck resulting in death of pedestrian_ - _Victim-deceased aged 42 years was_ - _agricultural labourer Tribunal determined monthly income of Rs.650 taking daily income as Rs.25 and after deducting Rs.250 towards her personal expenses awarded compensation <!l Rs. 706001-_ - _High Court affirmed the award of compensation but reduced interest fivm 91Yo lo_ 7%- _Instant appeal is filed by sons and daughter of the deceased seeking enhancement of compensation_ - _Held: The wages assessed by tribunal for the daily labourer at Rs.251- per day and the_ month~v _income al Rs.650/- is loo low_ - _The reasoning of the tribunal that a lady labourer may not get engagement daily is not acceptable_ - _Deceased being a woman and mother of three children, would have also contributed her physical labour for maintenance of household and also taking rnre of her children_ - _Taking income fmm the agricultural labour work at Rs.3.0001- p.m. and Rs.1.5001- p.m. fiJr the housdwld wurk. the_ month~v _income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.4.5001- p.111. deducting /!3rd/iJr personal expenses. contribution <if deceased toward> the family is calculated at Rs.3,0001- p.m. and Rs.36,000/- p.a. -As per the second schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for the age groups 40-45 yea1:5_ _**inultiplier is**_ **"/** _**5**_ ·· - _**.As per**_ **Sarla Verma** _**tle1..:isio11 jUr the age groups** 41-45 years. multiplier to be adopted is "14"_ - _Therefore, the multiplier of_ "/ _2" adopted by the tribunal and the High Court is not correct-Adopting the multiplier of "/4" loss of dependency is call'llfated at Rs.5,04.0001-_ - _Also, compensation <if Rs.15.0001for loss of estate and Rs. I 5,(!001- for fi111eral expenses is awarded_ - _Thus total compensation awarded to the claimants is enhanced lo Rs.5,34,0001- payable with interest at 1/1e rate of_ 7% _p.a._ H 242 243 LAXMIDHAR NAYAK AND ORS. v. JUGAL KlSHORE BEHERA AND ORS. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. PW-1 in his evidence stated that the victimdeeeased was earning Rs.35/- per day as wages out of the labour work. It is quite improbable that a labourer would be available for such a small amount of Rs.25/- per day. 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 arc a\'ltilablc for a labourer. Deceased even though was said to be earning only Rs.35/- per day at that time, over the years, she would have earned more. 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.ISO/- per day and Rs.4,500/- per month. Deducting I/3rd for personal expenses, contribution of deceased towards the family is calculated at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,UOO/c p.a. Deceased was aged 42 years. As per the second schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for the age groups 40-45 years mulliplicr is "15". As per Sarla Verma decision for the age groups 41-45 years mnltiplier to be adopted is "14". 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/- (3,000x12xl4). Further, 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. [Paras 6-9][245-D-H; 246-A-CJ _Sar/a Venn" (Smt.) and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr._ (2009) 6 SCC 121 : [2009] 5 SCR 1098; _National lnsumnce Company Limited_ v. _Pranay Sethi and Ors._ 2017 (13) SCALE 12 - relied on. A B c D E F G ## Case Law Reference [2009] 5 SCR 1098 relied on Para 7 2017 (13) SCALE 12 relied on Para 8 H 244 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2017] I l S.C.R. A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 19856. of2017. From the J udgmcnt and Order dated 27.01.2016 of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in MACA No. 802 of 2003. Chattamnjan Misra, Bhanu Pratap Singh, D. P. Singh Yadav, Binay B Kumar Das, Advs. for the Appellants. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by - **R. BANUMATHI, J.** l. Leave granted. 2. Appellants who are the sons and daughter of the deceased c 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 ofOrissa. 3. Mother of appcllants-Chanchali Nayak was working as an D agricultural labourer. On the date ofaccidcnt - 29.09.199 l at about 8.00 a.m., Chanchali Nayak was proceeding on the left side of the 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 Chaochali Nayak and she succumbed to injuries. In the claim E 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, F 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. I and 2 - owners of the bus and the - G 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 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. - H 245 LAXMIDHAR NAYAK AND ORS. v. JUGAL KISHORE BEHERA AND ORS. [R. BANUMATHJ, J.] On appeal to the High Court by the claimants, the High Court affirmed the quantum of compensation ofRs.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 j udgmcnt and the materials placed on record. 6. PW-! 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 ofRs.25/-per day and assessed the monthly income at Rs.650/ - per month. It is quite improbable that a labourer would be available for such a small amount ofRs.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 Jabour may not be available on all days throughout the year, in rural areas other kinds of work arc 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 Na yak. being a woman and mother of three children, would have also contributed her physical labour for maintenance ofhousehold 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 Jabour work at Rs.3,000/per month and Rs.1,500/- per month for the household work, the monthly income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.4,500/- per month deducting 1/3"' 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 Na yak was aged 42 years. As per the second schedule to the A B c D E F G H 246 [2017] I l S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS A Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for the age groups 40-45 years multiplier is '.' 15". As per _Sar/a Verma (Smt.) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another_ (2009) 6 SCC l 2 l, for the age groups 41-45 years multiplier to be adopted is" l 4". Therefore, the multiplier of" I 2" adopted by the tribunal and the High Court may not be correct. Hence, the multiplierof" 12" adopted may not be correct. Adopting the multiplier B of" 14" Joss ofdcpcndcncy is calculated at Rs.5,04,000/-(3,000xl2xl4). c 8. As per the tkcision of the Constitution Bcnch in _National l11sura11ce Company Li111i1ed_ 1: _Pranav Set/1i and Others_ 2017 (13) SCALE l 2. compensation of Rs.15,000/- for loss ofrstate and Rs.15,0001 - 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'Vo per annum. 9. The impugned judgment is modified and the compensation payable to the claimants is enhanced to Rs.5,34.000/-. The enhanced compensation is payabk with interest at the rate of7% per annum from D 27.01.2016 (the date of judgment of the High Court) and this appeal is pm1ly allowed. Respondents No. l to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the cnlrnnccd compensation with interest. **Appc:al partly allowt'd.** **Dc:vika Gujral**