MACT | Can't Assume Deceased Not Earning Only Because He Is In Class 12th, Must Be Compensated As Unskilled Labour: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that it cannot be assumed that the deceased in a motor vehicle accident was not earning only because he was a student in Class 12th. It held that compensation for such deceased must be calculated by treating the deceased to be an unskilled workman. Justice Sandeep Jain held,“Merely because the deceased was studying in Class 12, it cannot be presumed that he was not earning anything. It is apparent that claimants failed to submit any documentary proof of income and occupation of the deceased, as such, the tribunal has assessed the compensation on the basis of notional income of the deceased by presuming that he was earning Rs.15,000 per annum, which is grossly inadequate”The deceased passed away in a road accident on 10.06.2014. The compensation as awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, court no.7, Bulandshahr to his mother, sister and brother amounted to Rs.2,60,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum. An appeal was filed before the High Court for enhancement of compensation on grounds that the deceased was 22years old and working as a labourer earning about Rs.9,000/- per month. It was argued that the notional income of the deceased was assessed at Rs. 15,000 per annum which was grossly inadequate. It was also argued that the multiplier of 16 had been wrongly applied. Relying on Gurpreet Kaur and Others vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and Others and Jitendra vs. Sadiya & Others , the Court observed that the mother of the deceased had shown evidence regarding the deceased earing Rs. 9000 per month and studying in Class 12th at the time of his death. It was held that merely because he was studying in Class 12th would not have proved that the deceased was not working. “It is well settled that in the absence of documentary proof of income and occupation of the deceased, the tribunal was supposed to assess the compensation by treating the deceased to be an unskilled workman and was required to assess the compensation on the basis of minimum wages of an unskilled workman prevailing in the State of Uttar Pradesh at the time of accident, which was Rs.6,362/- per month.”Accordingly, the Court held that the claimants were entitled to compensation at Rs.6,362/- per month instead of Rs. 15,000 per annum. Further, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., the Court held that since the deceased was 22 years old, the multiplier of 18 was to be applied instead of 16. Noting that the deceased was a sole bread earner in the family of 4, the Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.16,04,092/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum. Accordingly, the appeal of enhancement was allowed. Case Title: Smt. Kashmiri And 3 Others Versus U.P.S.R.T.C. Thru Regional Manager And Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 32 [FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2841 of 2016]Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 32Click Here To Read/Download Order

MACT | Can't Assume Deceased Not Earning Only Because He Is In Class 12th, Must Be Compensated As Unskilled Labour: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

Tags