Scribd
Upload
592 views3 pages

Kishan Gopal & Ors. v. National Ins. Co. Ltd. (CHILD DEATH)

The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal regarding compensation for the death of a 10-year old boy in a road accident caused by rash and negligent driving. [1] The lower courts had denied compensation finding that the boy's death was not proven to be caused by the accident. [2] The Supreme Court overturned this, calculated compensation of Rs. 5 lakh based on notional income guidelines, and directed the insurance company to pay along with 9% annual interest. [3] The judgment adequately compensated the parents for the loss of their child in line with the principles of welfare legislation.

Uploaded by

11naqvi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
592 views3 pages

Kishan Gopal & Ors. v. National Ins. Co. Ltd. (CHILD DEATH)

The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal regarding compensation for the death of a 10-year old boy in a road accident caused by rash and negligent driving. [1] The lower courts had denied compensation finding that the boy's death was not proven to be caused by the accident. [2] The Supreme Court overturned this, calculated compensation of Rs. 5 lakh based on notional income guidelines, and directed the insurance company to pay along with 9% annual interest. [3] The judgment adequately compensated the parents for the loss of their child in line with the principles of welfare legislation.

Uploaded by

11naqvi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Kishan Gopal and Ors. Vs. Lala and Ors.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7137 OF 2013

Bench - Mr.G.S. Singhvi J. & Mr. Gopala Gowda J.

Date of Judgment- 26.08.2013

 FACTS -

1. The claimants are the parents of deceased Tikaram, aged 10, who died in a road accident
on account of rash and negligent driving.
2. The claimant preferred claim petition u/s 140 & 160 of the MV Act, 1988.
3. The insurance company plead that the tractor- trolley had no right to carry passenger in a
tractor as it is exclusively required to be used for the agricultural operation and therefore,
there is contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy issued in favour
of the owner of the offending vehicle.
4. The Tribunal, answered the issued no.1 i.e. whether tikaram died because of falling from
the tractor trolley driven rashly and negligently, after adverting to the averments of the
claim petition and evidence on record, and held that the Appellants have not succeeded in
proving that Tikaram died because of falling from the tractor-trolley which was driven
rashly and negligently by the driver. Issue No. 2 i.e. whether the claimants are entitled to
compensation was also answered holding that the Appellants are not entitled for the
compensation as claimed by them for the reason that the finding recorded on the issue
No. 1 is in the negative.
5. The High Court dismissed the appeal by passing an order.
6. Hence, this appeal is filed by appellant by appellant questioning the judgment of the High
Court.

 ISSUES -
1. Whether the findings of fact recorded on issue Nos. 1 & 2 framed by the Tribunal,
which finding is affirmed by the High Court in the impugned judgment is vitiated on
account of erroneous reasoning?
2. Whether the Appellants are entitled for compensation, if so to what amount?
3. What award?

 CALCULATION -

1. For this purpose, Second Schedule Under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act was referred, at
clause No. 6 which refers to notional income for compensation to those persons who had
no income prior to accident. The relevant portion of clause No. 6 states as under:

Notional income for compensation to those who had no income prior to accident.
(a) Non-earning persons - Rs. 15,000/- p.a.
(b) Notional income was taken Rs.30, 000/- considering the value of rupees over time.

2. Young age of mother was taken into consideration and by applying the principle laid
down in Sarla Verma case the multiplier of 15 was applied to the multiplicand.
I.e. 30,000 x 15= 4,50,000.

3. Further, Rs. 50,000/- under conventional head towards love and affection, funeral
expenses etc. were granted.

 JUDGMENT -

The appeal was allowed and the impugned judgments of lower court were set aside, the awarded
amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum was directed to be paid to the
Appellants from the date of filing of the application till the date of payment. The Insurance
Company was directed to issue the demand draft drawn on any Nationalized Bank by
apportioning the compensation amount equally with proportionate interest and send it to the
Appellants within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

 CONCLUSION -

The judgment given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is just and reasonable. The court has fairly
considered the nature of the MV Act i.e. welfare legislation and has granted compensation
keeping in mind that the parents are suffering the loss of the child and for that they have to be
compensated suitably as done by the court the above mentioned case.

****************************************************************

You might also like