Background of the Case
The Andhra Pradesh High Court considered appeals arising out of a fatal road accident in which a man riding a motorcycle along the Chittoor-Vellore Road near Gudipala Cross Road was hit by a Tavera car allegedly being driven rashly and negligently.
The deceased sustained injuries in the accident and subsequently succumbed to them. A criminal case was registered against the driver, and the police later filed a charge sheet. The offending vehicle was insured with Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited.
The deceased was survived by his wife and two children, who approached the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for his death.
Award Passed by the Tribunal
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal held the driver and the insurance company liable to pay compensation and awarded ₹7,33,400 to the deceased's family.
While calculating the compensation, the Tribunal considered the deceased's age as 48 years based on the entry in his Aadhaar card. His monthly income was assessed at ₹4,500.
Aggrieved by the compensation awarded, the claimants approached the High Court seeking enhancement. The insurance company also filed a separate appeal challenging the award.
Arguments of the Parties
The claimants contended that the Tribunal had incorrectly determined the deceased's age as 48 years by relying on his Aadhaar card. They submitted that the post-mortem certificate and other documentary evidence established that he was actually 45 years old.
They argued that the correct age was relevant for selecting the appropriate multiplier while calculating the loss of dependency. They accordingly sought application of multiplier 14.
The claimants further submitted that the deceased was working as a painter and was also engaged in agricultural activities. His monthly earnings were claimed to be ₹40,000 from these activities.
The insurance company, on the other hand, defended the Tribunal's assessment of age and also questioned certain components of the compensation awarded.
High Court's Findings on Age Recorded in Aadhaar Card
The High Court examined the documentary evidence relating to the deceased's age and accepted the claimants' contention that the Tribunal had incorrectly relied on the Aadhaar card.
The Court observed that an Aadhaar card is not conclusive proof of a person's date of birth and that the Tribunal had failed to properly appreciate the other documents placed on record.
The post-mortem certificate and other relevant records indicated that the deceased was 45 years old. The Court therefore accepted 45 years as his age instead of 48 years.
This difference was material because the applicable multiplier under the principles governing motor accident compensation depends upon the age of the deceased.
Accordingly, the Court applied multiplier 14 while recalculating the loss of dependency.
Reassessment of the Deceased's Income
The High Court also examined the Tribunal's assessment of the deceased's monthly income.
Although the claimants asserted that the deceased earned ₹40,000 per month through painting and agricultural activities, they had not produced sufficient documentary evidence to establish the entire amount claimed.
The Court therefore declined to accept the claimed monthly income of ₹40,000.
However, it also found that the Tribunal's assessment of ₹4,500 per month was inadequate. Considering the deceased's occupation and the circumstances of the case, the Court enhanced his monthly income to ₹6,500.
Recalculation of Compensation
After revising the deceased's age and monthly income, the High Court recalculated the compensation.
The Court added 30% towards future prospects, deducted one-third towards the deceased's personal and living expenses and applied multiplier 14.
The loss of dependency was consequently calculated at ₹9,46,400.
The Court also reassessed the compensation under conventional heads, including loss of consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate.
The compensation towards consortium was calculated at ₹1,45,200. A further ₹36,300 was awarded towards funeral expenses and loss of estate.
The total compensation payable to the deceased's family was thus enhanced to ₹11,27,900.
Final Decision
The Andhra Pradesh High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the deceased's family and dismissed the insurance company's appeal.
The Court directed the driver and the insurance company to deposit the enhanced compensation, together with interest at 7.5% per annum, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after giving credit for any amount already deposited.
The claimants were permitted to withdraw the compensation in accordance with their respective apportioned shares.
Legal Significance
The decision highlights the importance of properly evaluating documentary evidence while determining the age of a deceased person for calculating motor accident compensation.
An entry in an Aadhaar card cannot automatically be treated as conclusive proof of age when other relevant evidence, including a post-mortem certificate and contemporaneous records, indicates a different age.
The decision also reiterates the importance of realistically assessing the income of persons working in the unorganised sector. The absence of formal salary records or other documentary proof should not result in an arbitrary or excessively low assessment of income.
Since the age of the deceased directly determines the multiplier applicable for calculating loss of dependency, an incorrect assessment can substantially reduce the compensation payable to surviving family members.
Case Details
Case Name: S. Saraswathi & Others v. Ganesh Ashok Pewer & Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Date of Decision: Not independently verified
Case Number: M.A.C.M.A. Nos. 2510 and 1532 of 2018
Coram/Judge: Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedela
