Motor Accident Death | Compensation Must Balance Fiscal Conditions Of Country Where Deceased Earned & Place Where Kin Live: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court recently enhanced the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to the kin of a deceased victim, who was earning in foreign currency prior to his death.The Bench comprising Justices AJ Desai and Mauna Bhatt relied on Supreme Court's decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & ors. vs. Patricia Jean Mahajan & Ors. [(2002) 6 SCC 281] where it...
The Gujarat High Court recently enhanced the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to the kin of a deceased victim, who was earning in foreign currency prior to his death.
The Bench comprising Justices AJ Desai and Mauna Bhatt relied on Supreme Court's decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & ors. vs. Patricia Jean Mahajan & Ors. [(2002) 6 SCC 281] where it was held:
"Where there is so much of disparity in the economic conditions and affluence of the two places viz. The place to which the victim belongs and the place where the compensation is to be paid, a golden balance must be struck somewhere, to arrive at a reasonable and fair mesne."
In the instant case, the deceased was employed in Saudi Arabia and was earning SR 7500 per month which comes to Rs.1,22,000/-. The Tribunal had awarded Rs. 19.5 lacs as compensation after assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 15000/- p.m., by taking into consideration the income of a person who performs similar nature of work in India.
The High Court noted that deceased's basic salary was SR 4000 p.m. and that other allowances were largely dependent on the economic conditions and lifestyle of Saudi Arabia. It was thus of the view that the such variables need to be considered in Indian context so that the compensation is reasonable and does not amount to a windfall profit. Assessment has to made keeping in mind the income purchase power parity between India and Saudi Arabia, it added.
The bench came to a conclusion that a person having similar qualification with similar work if would have been employed in India, he would have earned Rs. 50,000/- per month.
Thus applying relevant multipliers, keeping in mind his age, marital status, prospective income and personal expenses, the Court awarded Rs. 71,40,000/- as compensation.
Case No.: C/FA/2483/2021
Case Title: IBRAHIM AHMED PATEL Versus VINODKUMAR BHANABHAI PARMAR
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 344
Click Here To Read/Download Judgment