(Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ.)
Mangri Devi and Others __________________________ Appellant(s);
v.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others ______________ Respondent(s).
Civil Appeal No………………….of 2025 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 12228 of 2023), decided on October 28, 2025
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants-claimants have filed the present appeal aggrieved against the judgment dated 13.09.2022 of the High Court1 seeking further enhancement of compensation on account of death of Bhadru Modi. The appellants-claimants are his widow, two sons and a daughter.
3. Briefly the facts, as evident from the impugned judgment, are that in a road accident which took place on 06.03.2004, Bhadru Modi, who was 39 years of age at the time of accident, died as a pillion rider on a motorcycle. His income was taken by the Tribunal2 as Rs. 67,920/- per annum. He was working as a loader with the Central Coalfields Limited. The Tribunal vide award dated 05.01.2009 assessed the compensation at Rs. 7,74,480/-. For the purpose of calculating the loss of income, his annual income was taken as Rs. 46,280/- and a cut of 1/3rd was applied on account of his personal expenses. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- was added under conventional heads.
3.1. Aggrieved against the award passed by the Tribunal, the appellants-claimants as well as the insurance company preferred appeals before the High Court. Vide impugned judgment, the High Court enhanced the annual income of Bhadru Modi to Rs. 1,54,464/-. After reducing the tax component of Rs. 5,892/- from the enhanced annual income, the remaining amount was Rs. 1,48,572/- on which a cut of 1/4th was applied for personal expenses. Multiplier of 15 was applied. The amount of compensation assessed was increased to Rs. 17,41,435/-, while adding Rs. 70,000/- under conventional heads. As a result, the appeal filed by the appellants-claimants was allowed and the one filed by the insurance company was dismissed.
4. The insurance company has not challenged the judgment of the High Court whereas the appellants-claimants are before this Court seeking further enhancement of compensation.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submitted that the High Court has failed to apply the principles of law as laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi3 providing for addition on account of future prospects in the income of the deceased for the purpose of assessment of compensation. Keeping in view the fact that the deceased was below 40 years of age on the date of accident, 50% increase on account of future prospects was required. Another argument raised is that the appellants-claimants are widow and three children (minor on the date of accident). The Tribunal had awarded Rs. 15,000/- on account of loss of consortium, Rs. 30,000/- on account of loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- on account of funeral expenses. The High Court granted Rs. 70,000/- in lump sum under the conventional heads. The argument is that not only widow is entitled to compensation on account of loss of consortium, even the children are also entitled thereto. For the purpose, reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in Smt. Anjali v. Lokendra Rathod4. In addition, increase of 10% is also required on the sum of Rs. 40,000/- each to which the minor children are entitled to as consortium.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurance company submitted that sufficient amount of compensation has already been awarded to the appellants-claimants by the High Court. Even though there was increase in the assessment of the income of the deceased but still the insurance company has not preferred any appeal. There is no scope for any further enhancement.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.
8. The basic facts which are not in dispute, as the findings recorded by the High Court have not been challenged by the insurance company, are hereunder:
| Date of Accident | 06.03.2004 |
| Age of Deceased | 39 years |
| Occupation | Loader in Central Coalfields Limited |
| Net annual income after reducing tax component | Rs. 1,48,572/- |
| Dependents | Widow and three minor children |
9. As is evident from the impugned judgment of the High Court, the income of the deceased was taken as Rs. 1,48,572/- per annum. Cut of 1/4th was applied, keeping in view the number of dependents being a widow and three minor children. Considering the age of the deceased, multiplier of 15 was applied. Nothing was added in the loss of income on account of future prospects. In terms of judgment of this Court in Pranay Sethi case (supra), in case the deceased had a permanent job and was below 40 years of age, an addition of 50% of the actual salary is to be added on account of future prospects. The actual salary means the salary less tax. In the case in hand, the salary which has been determined by the High Court, the component of tax has already been reduced. The annual salary of the deceased having been determined at Rs. 1,48,572/-, 50% thereof will come out to be Rs. 74,286/-. If the aforesaid amount is added in the salary of the deceased, the component of loss of income will come out to be Rs. 2,22,858/- (Rs. 1,48,572/- + Rs. 74,286/-). A cut of 1/4th is required to be applied on account of personal expenses. The sum shall come out to Rs. 55,715/-. The balance amount will be Rs. 1,67,143/-. Considering the age of the deceased, multiplier of 15 has to be applied. On calculation, the amount will come out to Rs. 25,07,145/- (Rs. 1,67,143 × 15). This is the amount determined under the head of loss of income.
9.1. The High Court has awarded a lump sum of Rs. 70,000/- under the conventional heads. The source thereof can be traced out in the judgment of this Court in Pranay Sethi case (supra.
“52. … Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively.”
10. It is on account of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses that Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/-, respectively were awarded by the High Court.
11. In terms of paragraph 17 of the judgment of this Court in Smt. Anjali case (supra), wherein while considering the judgment in Pranay Sethi case (supra), a sum of Rs. 40,000/- in each case was awarded to even the children on account of loss of parental consortium. In the case in hand, under the conventional head, the loss of consortium has only been awarded to the widow and not the three children (minor at the time of accident). Keeping in view the judgment of this Court in Smt. Anjali case (supra), Rs. 1,20,000/- need to be added on account of loss of consortium to three children. Adding the aforesaid amount, the total compensation would come out to Rs. 25,07,145/- + Rs. 70,000/- + Rs. 1,20,000/- = Rs. 26,97,145/-. The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 26,97,145/-. The impugned judgment of the High Court is modified to the extent mentioned above. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the same rate as was awarded by the High Court.
12. The appeal is allowed.
13. There shall be no order as to costs.
14. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 12228/2023
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-09-2022 in MA No. 104/2009 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi]
Mangri Devi & Ors.….Petitioner(s)
Versus
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.….Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
Leave granted.
The civil appeal is allowed in terms of the signed reportable order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
———
1 High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in M.A. No. 104 of 2009.
2 Court of 1st Additional District Judge-cum-MACT, Bermo at Tenughat.
3 (2017) 16 SCC 680 : 2017 INSC 1068
4 2022 16 SCR 661 : 2022 INSC 1258
