Supreme Court of India

Adikanda Sethi (Dead) Through L … vs Palani Swami Saran Transports & … on 8 May, 1997

Supreme Court of India
Adikanda Sethi (Dead) Through L … vs Palani Swami Saran Transports & … on 8 May, 1997
Bench: K. Ramaswamy, K.S. Paripoornam.
           PETITIONER:
ADIKANDA SETHI (DEAD) THROUGH L RS. & ANR.

	Vs.

RESPONDENT:
PALANI SWAMI SARAN TRANSPORTS & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:	08/05/1997

BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, K.S. PARIPOORNAM.




ACT:



HEADNOTE:



JUDGMENT:

O R D E R
Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both
sides.

This appeal by special leave arises from the Judgment
of the High Court of Orissa, made on 13.9.1993. in
Miscellaneous Appeal No. 384/90.

Ballav Kumar Sethi, a young man of 24 years was fatally
knocked down by oil Tanker bearing registration No. TCV 667.
The appellant claimed a sum of Rs.1 lakh towards the loss of
the estate of the deceased and the support to the appellant
as dependent of the deceased. the claim under section 110-A
of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939 was laid on April 30, 1983.

The Tribunal delivered the judgment awarding a sum of
Rs. 1,00,000/- to the appellant which was confirmed under
appeal by the High Court enhancing the same by a further sum
of Rs. 18,000\-.

The principle of determination of the compensation in
the case of fatal accident was determined by this Court in
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. vs. Trilok
Chandra & ors.
[(19960 4 SCC 362]. This court in
Paragraph 18 , after considering the tabulations, found that
the maximum multiplier of purchaser was as under:

“What we propose to emphasise is
that the multiplier cannot exceed
18 years’ Purchase factor. This is
the improvement over the earlier
position that ordinarily, it should
not exceed 16. We thought it
necessary to state the correct
legal position as courts and
tribunals are using higher
multiplier as in the present case
where the Tribunal used the
multiplier of 24 which the High
Court raised to 34, thereby showing
lack of awareness of the background
of the multiplier system in Davies
case.”

Thus, we have to conclude that the annual income of the
deceased is Rs.12,000/- p.a. and he would have spent
Rs.7,500/- towards family members and 1/3 for himself;
thereby the annual income is taken at Rs.9,000/- per year
and multiplier of 18 years which is the maximum in the case
of the young person dying in an accident, has to be applied.
The claimants would get Rs. 1.40 lakhs towards the
compensation. Since the claim is limited to Rs 1 lakh, the
claimants are entitled to get Rs. 1 lakh, the claimants are
entitled to Rs.1 lakh, the claimants are entitled to get
Rs.1 lakh as compensation with interest at 6% p.a. from the
date of the judgment of the High court.

The appeal is accordingly allowed. No. costs.