Devendra Kumar Tripathi vs The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd
- Neutral2025 INSC 1429
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In computing compensation for the death of a minor child in a motor accident claim, the monthly notional income shall be determined by reference to the minimum wages prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for the relevant class of city, with a 40% increase for future prospects, applied to a multiplier of 15, and reduced by one-half for personal expenses. In determining the applicable multiplier for compensation in the death of a minor child, a multiplier of 15 is appropriate, rather than 18, where the child has died (as opposed to a case where a child has suffered grievous injury and become disabled and must live with a debilitating condition), and the claim stands on a different footing from that of a disabled child. Where a minor child has died one day after suffering injuries in a motor accident, the parents are entitled to compensation for the pain and suffering endured by the child during that period before death, which compensation inures to the benefit of the legal heirs. In addition to loss of dependency, parents of a deceased minor child are entitled to separate heads of compensation including loss of estate, loss of filial consortium, medical expenses, funeral expenses, and compensation for the child's pain and suffering before death, each calculated at specified rates.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
2. A 14-year-old boy, proceeding to school with two of his classmates, met with an accident when a truck driven rashly and negligently took their lives. The son of the appellants No.1 and 2 herein died a day after, in the hospital while the two school mates died on the spot.
3. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in the claim Signature Not Verified petition of the parents granted a meagre amount of Digitally signed by
VARSHA MENDIRATTA
Date: 2025.12.15
15:01:33 IST
Reason:
CA@SLP (C) No.2195 of 2024 Rs.1,29,500/- (Rupees one lakh, twenty-nine thousand and five hundred) with 6% interest per annum. On a claim for enhancement being made before the High Court, the High Court enhanced it to Rs.4,70,000/- (Rupees four lakhs and seventy thousand) again with 6% interest.
4. Before us, Mr. John Mathew, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that there was sufficient evidence produced before Court with respect to the earning of persons, who studied along with the deceased, his contemporaries, who went on to take up different gainful employments. The criteria adopted by the High Court is grossly inadequate, is the contention raised. It is also submitted that a multiplier of 18 has to be adopted.
Reliance was also placed on Baby Sakshi Greola v.
Manzoor Ahmad Simon and Another1, the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court. Therein a seven-year-old child had suffered grievous injuries and was rendered disabled wherein the multiplier of 18 was adopted.
1
2024 INSC 963
CA@SLP (C) No.2195 of 2024 5. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the insurance company, fairly submitted that he has no objection with respect to the minimum wages being adopted but the multiplier has to be kept at 15 as has been laid down in Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan2.
6. The facts in Baby Sakshi Greola (supra) are quite distinct from the present case. Here the child died and the claim of compensation by the parents would definitely stand on a different footing from that of a claim filed by a disabled child, destined to live the rest of his/her life with a debilitating condition of mental retardation and severe incontinence.
7. Be that as it may, we are of the opinion that the monthly notional income can be adopted as per the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, which both learned Counsel agree, for a Class B city is at Rs.5400/- per month. A 40% increase has to be adopted for future prospects and the multiplier is 15 as held in Reshma Kumari (supra) and 2 2013 SCC OnLine SC 284 CA@SLP (C) No.2195 of 2024 one-half deduction for personal expenses. The provision of Rs.50,000/- as medical expenses is retained. The claimants are further entitled to loss of estate and funeral expenses at the rate of Rs.15,000/- each and loss of filial consortium at the rate of Rs.40,000/- each.
8. In the present case, the child had died after a day and hence the parents would be entitled to some compensation for the pain and suffering suffered by the child on his death; which inure to the benefit of the legal heirs, which we compute at Rs.25,000/-. The total compensation, hence, would be:-
Sr. No. Heads of Claim Amount 1. Loss of dependency Rs.6,80,400/-
Rs.5400 x 12 x 140% x 15 x 1/2
2. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
3. Loss of consortium @ Rs.80,000/-
Rs.40,000/-
4. Medical expenses Rs.50,000/-
5. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
6. Compensation for pain and Rs.25,000/-
suffering
Total amount Rs.8,65,400/-
CA@SLP (C) No.2195 of 2024 9. The above amount shall be paid to the appellants, after deducting the amount already paid, within a period of two months from the date of this order with interest at the rate of 7.5%.
10. The appeal stands allowed with the above modification.
11. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
……..…….……………………. J.
(AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH)
…………….……………………. J.
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)
NEW DELHI
DECEMBER 15, 2025.
CA@SLP (C) No.2195 of 2024
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