http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: ADIKANDA SETHI (DEAD) THROUGH L RS. & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: PALANI SWAMI SARAN TRANSPORTS & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       08/05/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, K.S. PARIPOORNAM.

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.  We have  heard learned  counsel on both sides.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the Judgment of  the   High  Court  of  Orissa,  made  on  13.9.1993.  in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 384/90.      Ballav Kumar Sethi, a young man of 24 years was fatally knocked down by oil Tanker bearing registration No. TCV 667. The appellant claimed a sum of Rs.1 lakh towards the loss of the estate  of the deceased and the support to the appellant as dependent  of the deceased. the claim under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939 was laid on April 30, 1983.      The Tribunal  delivered the  judgment awarding a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-  to the  appellant which  was confirmed under appeal by the High Court enhancing the same by a further sum of Rs. 18,000\-.      The principle  of determination  of the compensation in the case  of fatal  accident was determined by this Court in U.P. State  Road Transport  Corporation &  Ors.  vs.  Trilok Chandra &  ors.   [(19960 4    SCC  362].    This  court  in Paragraph 18 , after considering the tabulations, found that the maximum multiplier of purchaser was as under:      "What   we propose  to emphasise is      that the  multiplier cannot  exceed      18 years’  Purchase factor. This is      the improvement  over  the  earlier      position that ordinarily, it should      not  exceed   16.  We   thought  it      necessary  to   state  the  correct      legal  position     as  courts  and      tribunals    are    using    higher      multiplier as  in the  present case      where   the   Tribunal   used   the      multiplier of  24  which  the  High      Court raised to 34, thereby showing      lack of awareness of the background      of the  multiplier system in Davies      case."      Thus, we have to conclude that the annual income of the deceased  is  Rs.12,000/-  p.a.  and  he  would  have  spent

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Rs.7,500/- towards  family  members  and  1/3  for  himself; thereby the  annual income  is taken  at Rs.9,000/- per year and multiplier  of 18 years which is the maximum in the case of the young person dying in an accident, has to be applied. The  claimants   would  get   Rs.  1.40  lakhs  towards  the compensation.   Since the claim is limited to Rs 1 lakh, the claimants  are entitled to get Rs. 1 lakh, the claimants are entitled to  Rs.1 lakh,  the claimants  are entitled  to get Rs.1 lakh  as compensation with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the judgment of the High court.      The appeal is accordingly allowed.  No. costs.