Hansa Devi vs SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd.
- Neutral2025 INSC 706
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
1. In assessing the income of a deceased driver in a motor accident compensation claim, the court will accept the income claimed by the claimants before the Tribunal where it is reasonable in relation to established benchmarks; specifically, where a coolie earned Rs. 4,500/- in 2004, an incremental increase of Rs. 500/- per year would justify an unskilled labourer or driver earning approximately Rs. 10,000/- per month in 2014, and the High Court cannot arbitrarily reduce this to statutory minimum wages without justification. 2. Children and parents of a deceased, in addition to the surviving spouse, are entitled to claim and receive compensation for loss of consortium in motor accident claims under the applicable law. 3. Where claimants do not appeal against the Tribunal's award of compensation and the insurance company's appeal results in an unjustified reduction by the High Court, the Supreme Court will restore the Tribunal's award without enhancement, as there is no basis for the claimants to seek more than what they originally claimed. 4. Compensation awarded by a Tribunal in a motor accident claim shall be disbursed with interest within the stipulated period, and where minor children are beneficiaries, their share shall be deposited in a fixed deposit with interest disbursed to the mother as guardian until the children attain majority.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
2025 INSC 706 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. _______ OF 2025 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No.10822 of 2021]
HANSA DEVI & ORS. APPELLANT (S) VERSUS
SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
JUDGEMENT
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants are the legal representatives
of the deceased in a motor accident; the widow,
three minor children and parents. The deceased
was the driver of a truck in which a
helper/cleaner was accompanying him. The Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by driver had alighted after parking the truck and Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2025.05.15 18:38:31 IST
when he was boarding the truck, another truck Reason:
Page 1 of 5 SLP (C) No.10822 of 2021
driven rashly and negligently hit him and he
died on the spot. The helper/cleaner who was
PW2 before the Tribunal, admitted him to the
hospital and gave a First Information Statement
leading to the registration of an FIR. The
claimants were before the Tribunal seeking
compensation for the death of the bread winner
of the family who was 28 years old when he
met with the accident and succumbed. The
Tribunal awarded a total amount of
Rs.23,07,000/- to the dependents adopting the
salary claimed of Rs.10,000/- and reducing 1/3rd
for personal expenses while taking 3/4 th of 40%
of the income of the deceased as future
prospects. The wife was granted loss of
consortium @ Rs.40,000/-, the children @
Rs.25,000/- each and the parents @ Rs.10,000/-
each. The funeral expenses and loss of estate
was also awarded @ Rs.15,000/- each.
Page 2 of 5 SLP (C) No.10822 of 2021
3. The Insurance Company filed an appeal
before the High Court in which there was
considerable deduction made especially on the
salary, which was reduced to Rs.4,076/-
adopting the minimum wages for a driver @
Rs.5,434/- with 40% future prospects. The
claimants were granted only Rs.40,000/-
towards loss of consortium. The amount
awarded was reduced to Rs.12,34,105/-.
4. We find no reason to accede to the reduction
of income as done by the High Court. The
accident occurred on 08.05.2014. In
Ramachandrappa v. Royal Sundaram
Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd1 this Court held
that even a coolie would get an income of
Rs.4,500/-in the year 2004. Hence, an unskilled
labourer considering the marginal and
incremental increase in each successive year @
Rs.500/- per year would be entitled to get
1 (2011) 13 SCC 236
Page 3 of 5 SLP (C) No.10822 of 2021 almost Rs.10,000/- in the year 2014. Hence, the
claim made before the Tribunal with respect to
the driver of heavy vehicle getting Rs.10,000/-
as wages per month must be necessarily
accepted. Insofar as the loss of consortium, it
has been held in New India Assurance
Company v. Somwati and Ors.2 that even
the children and the parents are entitled to
compensation for loss of consortium.
5. Since no appeal is filed by the claimants
from the award of the Tribunal, we do not think
there is any enhancement required. Still the
award made as compensation for loss of
consortium to the children and the parents by
the Tribunal has to be retained. On the above
reasoning, we set aside the order of the High
Court restoring the order of the Tribunal. The
amounts, with interest, as awarded by the
Tribunal shall be disbursed to the claimants
2 (2020) 9 SCC 644
Page 4 of 5 SLP (C) No.10822 of 2021 within a period of two months, which shall be
equally apportioned in the name of the wife,
children and parents. If any of the minor
children have not attained majority, the amount
shall be kept in a fixed deposit, the interest of
which can be disbursed to the mother who is
the guardian. The insurance company shall
deposit the amounts within the period
stipulated before the Tribunal and the Tribunal
shall apportion the amounts as directed
hereinabove.
6. The appeal is allowed.
7. Pending applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of.
...……….……………………. J.
(SUDHANSHU DHULIA)
………….……………………. J.
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)
NEW DELHI;
MAY 15, 2025.
Page 5 of 5 SLP (C) No.10822 of 2021
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