Anita and Others v. Arun Yadav and Others
Background
The appellants, the widow, two minor daughters, and mother of a man who died in a motor accident, were unhappy with the compensation fixed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Rs. 6,90,400) and later increased somewhat by the High Court. The deceased worked as a driver for a private establishment and also drove a taxi privately, but the lower courts had not properly accounted for his full earning capacity from both sources.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that as a skilled worker (a driver, not merely semi-skilled), his base income should be assessed using the Haryana government's minimum wage notification for skilled Category B workers (Rs. 4,360/month), and added a further Rs. 100/day for his private taxi income, bringing total monthly income to Rs. 7,360. Applying a 50% addition for future prospects, deducting one-fourth for personal expenses, and using the agreed multiplier of 18, the Court recalculated the loss-of-income component at Rs. 17,88,480, and retained/added the High Court's awards for loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, transportation, and funeral expenses. The appeal was allowed, raising the total compensation to Rs. 21,73,480 with 8% annual interest from the date of filing the claim petition, with no order as to costs.
Lesson Learnt
In motor accident claims, courts will properly account for a deceased breadwinner's full earning capacity, including a second informal source of income like private taxi driving, rather than limiting compensation to only the documented primary salary, and will use objective benchmarks like government minimum-wage notifications where direct income evidence is thin.