Anita And Others vs Arun Yadav And Others
- SCC(2018) 17 SCC 465
- Neutral2017 INSC 868
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the actual income of a deceased skilled worker cannot be precisely ascertained, the court shall determine income by reference to the statutory minimum wages applicable to that category of worker, and shall then add a reasonable addition (50 per cent) for future prospects before deducting estimated personal expenses and applying the agreed multiplier to calculate loss of earning capacity. A driver is classified as a skilled worker rather than a semi-skilled worker, and statutory minimum wages prescribed for skilled workers are the proper basis for income computation in compensation awards, even where the deceased's actual income is undisputed but assessed at a lower figure.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11115 OF 2017
ANITA AND OTHERS ... APPELLANT (S)
VERSUS
ARUN YADAV AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENT (S)
JUDGMENT
KURIAN, J.:
The only grievance of the appellants is on the computation of
income. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that there was
no dispute that the deceased was a driver and yet the income that is
taken by the Tribunal as well as the High Court is Rs.4,200/-.
2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has
brought to our notice the notification issued by the Government of
Haryana, Labour Department, where a skilled person in Category ‘B’
has been granted minimum wages to the tune of Rs.4,360/-. A driver
is not a semi-skilled person but a skilled person. Therefore, in any
case, we are of the view that the income should have been assessed
at Rs.4,360/- per month. Adding 50 per cent for the future prospects, Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by
it comes to Rs.6,540/-. After deducting 1/4 th towards the personal NARENDRA PRASAD Date: 2017.09.16 14:45:02 IST Reason:
expenses, what would have been saved to the estate would be
1 Rs.4,905/- per month. Taking the undisputed multiplier of 18, the
amount comes to Rs.10,59,480/-
3. The High Court has rightly awarded Rs 1,00,000/- towards loss
of consortium to the widow. The two minor daughters will be entitled
to Rs 1,00,000/- each, i.e., Rs. 2,00,000/- and the mother and father
get Rs. 50,000/- each, i.e., Rs 1,00,000/-, on account of loss of love
and affection. The transportation expenses awarded by the High
Court to the tune of Rs 10,000/- is maintained. Towards funeral
expenses, the appellant shall be entitled to Rs 25,000/-. The
appellant shall also be entitled to litigation costs to the tune of Rs
50,000/-. Thus, the appellant will get a total compensation of Rs
15,44,480/- with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from
the date of filing of the Claim Petition.
4. The Appeal is allowed to the above extent. Pending
applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
5. There shall be no order as to costs.
.......................J. (KURIAN JOSEPH)
.……………………J. (R. BANUMATHI) New Delhi;
SEPTEMBER 7, 2017.
2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free