Bombay High Court

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. THROUGH ITS MUMBAI REGIONAL OFFICE-IIversusMRS. SUVARNA ARUN KORE AND ANR.

Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: M W CHANDWANI

Holding

The Tribunal must deduct one‑third of the deceased’s income for personal expenses and apply a 25% factor for future prospects for a 47‑year‑old businessman, leading to a reduced compensation award.

Summary

National Insurance Co. Ltd. appealed against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award that granted Rs. 36,50,400 as dependency compensation for the death of Arun Mahadev Kore. The insurer argued that the Tribunal failed to deduct one‑third of the deceased’s income for personal expenses and applied an excessive 30% addition for future prospects despite the deceased being a 47‑year‑old businessman. The High Court examined precedents requiring a personal‑expenses deduction and a 25% future‑prospects factor for persons in the 40‑50 age group. Applying these principles, the Court recalculated the compensation to Rs. 24,50,000, ordered interest on the amount, and directed any excess paid to be refunded to the insurer. The appeal was partly allowed, modifying the original award accordingly.

Issues considered

Whether the Tribunal should have deducted one‑third of the deceased’s income for personal expenses in assessing dependency compensation.
Whether the 30% addition for future prospects is appropriate for a deceased aged 47 in a business occupation.
Whether the multiplier and other components of the compensation award were correctly applied.

Subjects

motor accident
dependency compensation
personal expenses deduction
future prospects
multiplier
insurance claim
civil appeal

Judgment

44-FA-964-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

FIRST APPEAL NO. 964 OF 2024

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Mumbai … Appellant
Regional Office-II
Versus
Mrs. Suvarna Arun Kore And Anr. … Respondents
***
Adv. N. D. Joshi for the Appellant.

Mr. Tejas Dande, Ms. Shama Mulla and Mr. Bharat G. for the Respondent Nos.
1 and 2.

Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam for the Respondent No. 3.
***
CORAM : M.W. CHANDWANI, J.
DATE : 18th April, 2026.
P. C. :

1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

2. The present present First Appeal challenges the Judgment and Award

dated 08.11.2014 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Kolhapur, (for short, “the Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.

251 of 2012 whereby Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (original claimants) were

awarded compensation of Rs. 36,50,400/- towards loss of dependency on

account of the death of Arun Mahadev Kore, who died in a vehicular accident

on 18.03.2012.

Shubham 1
44-FA-964-2024.doc

3. The Appellant–Insurance Company has preferred this Appeal solely on

the ground that, the learned Tribunal failed to consider the deduction

towards personal expenses of the deceased while assessing the dependency of

Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

4. I have gone through the impugned Judgment and Award.

5. It appears that the Tribunal has concluded that the deceased was

earning Rs. 18,000/- per month and accordingly assessed the annual income

at Rs. 2,16,000/-. The Tribunal further added 30% of the income, i.e., Rs.

64,800/-, towards future prospects.

6. It is to be noted here that, as per the decision in Sarla Verma and ors

vs Delhi Transport Corporation and anr 1,., where the number of dependents

are two to three, one-third of the income is required to be deducted towards

personal expenses of the deceased. Evidently, the impugned order does not

reflect any such deduction. The Tribunal directly applied the multiplier after

assessing the annual income without deducting personal expenses. Hence,

the impugned order warrants interference.

7. Furthermore, the addition towards future prospects granted by the

Tribunal is excessive in light of the decision in National Insurance Company

Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi 2 wherein it is held that, for a person in the age

group of 40 to 50 years, future prospects should be assessed at 25%.

1 (2009) 6 SCC 121
2 (2017) 16 SCC 680

Shubham 2
44-FA-964-2024.doc

Accordingly, the compensation payable to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 is

recalculated as under:

Sr. Particulars Amount in
No rupees.
1 Income of the deceased Rs. 18,000/- p.m. x12 Rs. 2,16,000/-
2 25% future prospect. Rs. 2,16,000/- x 25% Rs. 54,000/-
As per pranay sethi Judgment Age
47 & occupation business
Sub Total Rs. 2,70,000/-
3. Less:- 1/3 deduction towards Rs. 2,70,000/- / 1/3 = Rs. 1,80,000/-
personal expenses Rs. 90,000/-
4. Multiplier @13 Rs. 1,80,000 X 13 Rs. 23,40,000/-
5. Compensation towards Rs. 1,10,000/-
Funeral charges = Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of Consortium = Rs. 40,000/- x 2
Loss of Estate = Rs. 15,000/-
Sub Total Rs. 24,50,000/-

8. Accordingly, the First Appeal is partly allowed.

9. The impugned order dated 08.11.2014 passed by the Member, Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Kolhapur is modified as under:

(a) Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to compensation of Rs.

24,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) along

with @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of Application till its realization.

Further, the Respondents has already withdrawn an amount of Rs.

12,14,440/- and the remaining amount payable to the Respondent

Nos. 1 and 2 shall be paid to them along with accrued interest.

Shubham 3
44-FA-964-2024.doc

(b) Excess amount, if any deposited by the Appellant shall be

refunded back to the Appellant along with accrued interest.

[ M.W. CHANDWANI, J. ]

Digitally
signed by
TALLE
TALLE SHUBHAM
SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO
ASHOKRAO Date:
2026.04.27
20:27:29
+0530

Shubham 4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…