1. The appellants are the parents aggrieved with the
reduction of compensation awarded for the death of
their son in a motor accident, by the impugned
judgment of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.
2. A 10-year old boy while cycling to school was hit
by a bus of the respondent-Corporation. The appeal is
the Corporation as to the negligence found on their
driver.
3. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.8,55,000/-
reckoning the income of the child at Rs.5,000/- per
month and determining the compensation for loss of
dependency adopting the multiplier of 18 and
deducting 2/3rd for personal expenses. An amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- was granted for the loss of love and
affection along with funeral expenses of Rs.25,000 and
Rs.5,000/- each for transportation and loss of dress,
ornaments and cycle.
4. The High Court reduced the income by
Rs.2,70,000/- finding that Rs.30,000/- per year as per the
Schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881 was to be
adopted as the income and the multiplier applicable is
only 15 considering the age of the mother. While the
amount for loss of love and affection was confirmed,
1 “the Act”
funeral expenses was reduced to Rs.15,000/- and the
amounts granted for transportation and damage to
clothes and cycle were deleted. A further amount of
Rs.15,000/- was granted as loss of estate, thus reducing
the total award amounts to Rs.5,80,000/-.
5. There is no straight jacket formula as to the
income to be adopted in the case of children when they
suffer injuries or succumb to death, in a motor vehicle
accident. In fact, the Tribunal had considered a Division
Bench decision which adopted the income of Rs.5,000/-
per month for a 9-year old. The High Court does not give
any reasoning to deviate from the said monthly income
adopted by a Division Bench and merely adopts the
income as per Schedule II. Schedule II is applied in
cases where the claim is made under Section 163A of the
Act, which proceeds on a ‘no fault liability’. In the
present case a claim under Section 166 of the Act was
preferred and there was negligence found on the driver
of the offending vehicle.
6. We are of the opinion that the monthly income of
Rs.5,000/- as adopted for the child by the Tribunal is
perfectly in order. There is no question of any deduction
for personal expenses and hence even if the multiplier
adopted is 15, considering the mother’s age of 36, the
total compensation for loss of dependency would be
Rs.7,50,000/-, Rs.30,000 more than that awarded by the
Tribunal. Insofar as the loss of love and affection is
concerned, the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi2
permits only Rs.40,000/- each and funeral expenses as
rightly reduced by the High Court has to be Rs.15,000/.
We find no rationale for the High Court to have deleted
the transportation expenses and loss of dress,
ornaments and cycle. As rightly awarded by the High
Court, loss of estate has to be compensated with
Rs.15000/-. Hence, even if just compensation of
Rs.80,000 is fixed as loss of filial consortium as
applicable to both the parents and the funeral expenses
2 (2017) 16 SCC 680
is reduced to Rs.15,000/-, the total compensation would
be Rs.8,70,000/- as below:
Sr. No. Particulars Amount
1.Loss of dependency (Rs.5,000/- x 15) Rs.7,50,000/-
2.Compensation for filial consortium @ Rs. 80,000/-Rs.40,000/- each
3.Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
4.Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
5.Transportation Rs.5,000/-expenses
6.Loss of dress, Rs.5,000/-ornaments and cycle Total Rs.8,70,000/-
7.However, there is no appeal from the quantum filed by the claimants. Hence the order of the Tribunal is restored and the appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the High Court. The claimants shall be paid the amounts as awarded by the Tribunal after deducting the amounts already paid or deposited, within a period of one month from today with interest as directed by the Tribunal or the High Court.
8.Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (K. VINOD CHANDRAN) (N.V. ANJARIA) NEW DELHI; AUGUST 08, 2025.