Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Chandra Kala vs ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance Co. Ltd.

Supreme Court26 September 2025

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the deceased was an unskilled or semi-skilled worker without documentary proof of earnings, the court may adopt the minimum wage applicable to a comparable skilled worker at the time of the accident, adjusted for incremental increases over the years since an earlier comparable precedent, rather than the lower wage found by the tribunal based on accepted daily wage rates. Each claimant who is a dependent of the deceased — including the spouse and each child — is entitled to compensation for loss of consortium at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- per person, regardless of whether the dependents are adult or minor. In computing compensation for loss of future income in a fatal accident case, the court applies a multiplier based on the age of the deceased as established in precedent (here, 14 for a 43-year-old), adds 25% for future prospects, and deducts one-quarter for personal expenses, yielding a net multiplicand of 75% of the notional monthly income.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

2025 INSC 1220 Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Civil Appeal Nos. _____ of 2025 (@Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.5687-88 of 2020)

Smt. Chandra Kala & Ors. …Appellants Versus

ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance Company Limited & Ors. …Respondents

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. The appeal is against the quantum of award. The award

of the Tribunal was challenged in first appeal by both the

claimants and the Insurance Company.

3. The appellants contended that the deceased was a

Mason and was earning an income of Rs. 400 per day. The

Tribunal found that there was no documentary proof and

adopted the income of Rs. 189 per day, which the High Court

confirmed was the accepted daily wage at the time when the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by POOJA SHARMA Date: 2025.10.11 15:10:23 IST

accident occurred.

Reason:

Page 1 of 4

CA @ SLP (C) Nos.5687-88 of 2020

4. Ramachandrappa vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram

Alliance Insurance Company Limited1 held that a Coolie

would be entitled to a minimum wage of Rs. 4,500/- in a month;

with reference to an accident that occurred in 2004.

Considering an incremental increase of Rs.500/- for every

year, in 2014, when the accident in the present case occurred

even a Coolie would have been entitled to Rs. 9,500/- per

month. There can be no documentary proof offered for the

income of a Mason, who is also a skilled worker. In any event,

it would be safe to adopt a monthly income of Rs. 9,500/- The

High Court, considering the decision in Pranay Sethi2,

adopted a multiplier of 14 for the 43-year-old deceased, and

also made an addition of 25% for future prospects and

deducted 1/4th for personal expenses, which computation is

perfectly in order.

5. As compensation for loss of consortium, the High Court

has awarded an amount of Rs. 40,000/-. In fact, it was held that

loss of parental and filial consortium is payable to wife and

1 (2011) 13 SCC 236 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680

Page 2 of 4 CA @ SLP (C) Nos.5687-88 of 2020 children at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- each in New India

Assurance Company v. Somwati and Ors.3 In the present

case, the wife and three minor children of the deceased were

before Court claiming compensation for the death of the only

breadwinner of their family. All the claimants are entitled to

Rs. 40,000/- each for loss of consortium. In addition, on the

conventional heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses,

amount of Rs. 15,000/- each is awarded.

Sr. No. Particulars Amounts

1. Compensation for loss of future income Rs. 14,96,250/-

(Rs.9,500 x 12 x 14 x 125% x ¾)

2. Loss of consortium Rs. 1,60,000/-

(Rs.40,000 x 4)

3. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-

4. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-

Total Rs.16,86,250/-

3 (2020) 9 SCC 644

Page 3 of 4 CA @ SLP (C) Nos.5687-88 of 2020

6. The awarded amounts shall be paid, after deducting that

already paid, with interest @ 6% per annum as directed by the

Tribunal from the date of application till the date of payment.

7. The appeals stand allowed with the above-said

modifications.

8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

…….…………..………………. J.

(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)

…….…………..………………. J.

(N.V. ANJARIA) NEW DELHI;

SEPTEMBER 26, 2025.

Page 4 of 4 CA @ SLP (C) Nos.5687-88 of 2020

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