Madhya Pradesh High Court upholds Rs 77.40 lakh award for BSF employee’s family

The high court was hearing the family’s appeal seeking enhancement of the Rs 77.40 lakh compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the Rs 77.40 lakh compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Indore, to the family of a Border Security Force (BSF) man killed in a 2019 road accident. The court found no reason to interfere with the tribunal’s assessment of his income.

Justice Jai Kumar Pillai was hearing a plea of the man’s widow and other claimants to the compensation awarded by the MACT on November 17, 2022. The family had sought an additional Rs 7 lakh and an increase in the interest rate from 6 per cent to 9 per cent per annum.

“The findings recorded by the learned Tribunal do not suffer from any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs 77.40 lakh, which constitutes just and reasonable compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Accordingly, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned award…The award represents a substantial and just sum that accurately mirrors the loss of dependency and conventional heads in accordance with the established legal principles,” the court said on September 10.

The case arose from a fatal road accident on February 10, 2019. Shamsuddin, an employee of the BSF was riding his motorcycle from Betma towards his residence at the BSF Campus on Bijasan Road, Indore. According the order, an Eicher vehicle hit his motorcycle on Airport Road, Navada Panth. He suffered grievous injuries and was taken to the district hospital, where doctors declared him dead, following which an FIR was also registered at Chandan Nagar police station.

Justice Jai Kumar Pillai noted that mandatory statutory deductions and income tax liabilities had to be considered while assessing the deceased’s income for compensation. (Image enhanced using AI)

Shamsuddin was described in the proceedings as a skilled employee working with the BSF. He left behind his widow, two minor children and aged parents and was the sole earning member of the family.

After his death, the claimants approached the MACT seeking compensation, which, after considering the pleadings and evidence, awarded Rs 77.40 lakh on November 17, 2022. The BSF man’s family then approached the high court, arguing that the compensation was on the lower side. Their principal grievance concerned the income used to calculate the loss of dependency.

The appellants argued that the BSF man’s income should have been assessed at Rs 42,511 per month, or Rs 6,24,684 annually. They contended that the tribunal had failed to properly appreciate his salary and had not adequately considered the prospects of his income.

The claimants also argued that BSF man’s was the sole earning member and that his widow, two minor children and aged parents were dependent on him. They separately challenged the 6 per cent interest fixed by the tribunal and sought an increase to 9 per cent per annum.

Opposing the appeal, the counsel of the insurance company argued that the tribunal had correctly assessed the deceased’s income, made the appropriate statutory deductions and applied the relevant multiplier and prospects. It maintained that the Rs 77.40 lakh award was just and reasonable and did not require enhancement.

After hearing the parties and examining the record, the high court found no error in the tribunal’s assessment of the BSF man’s income. The court specifically examined the documentary evidence relating to his employment and salary with the BSF. It agreed with the tribunal that the “actual, actionable monthly salary” for calculating dependency was Rs 34,913.

The court said the tribunal had undertaken a detailed assessment of Shamsuddin’s pay slips and income-tax liabilities before arriving at the Rs 34,913 figure holding that the resultant figure was “factually accurate and legally sound”. The family’s plea for an increase in interest from 6 per cent to 9 per cent was also rejected.

The high court observed that the award of interest under the Motor Vehicles Act is discretionary and should align with prevailing banking rates at the time of the award. It found that the 6 per cent rate fixed by the tribunal was consistent with established judicial precedents and prevailing economic conditions.