HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Reserved on: 07.05.2024 Pronounced on: 03.02.2025 Case:- Mac App No. 19/2021 1. Surinder Gupta, aged 63 years, S/o Shri Charan Dass Gupta, R/o 574/C, Sainik Colony, Jammu. 2. Neena Gupta, aged 58 years, W/o Shri Surinder Gupta, R/o 574/C, Sainik Colony, Jammu. …..Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Anil Sethi, Advocate. Vs 1. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Registered and Head Office, A25/27, Asif Ali Road, New Delhi – 110002, Branch DOI, Town Hall, Jammu. 2. M/s Trishul Bottlers, Sikandpur, Bishnah, District Jammu. .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. D. S. Chauhan, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE JUDGMENT 01. The appellants are parents who came to suffer loss of their son, namely, Kapil Gupta meeting a fatal accident caused by a Petrol Tanker bearing registration No. JK02Q-9270 on 27.01.2011 which resulted in a claim petition filed by them being allowed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short, “MACT”), Jammu thereby granting compensation of an amount of Rs. 31,84,000/- in their favour and for seeking enhancement of which the appellants have come forward with the present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before this Court. 2 Mac App No. 19/2021 02. The offending vehicle Petrol Tanker No. JK02Q-9270 at the time of accident was owned by the respondent No. 2 – M/s Trishul Bottlers, Sikandpur, Bishnah and insured by the respondent No. 1 – Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. 03. At the time of accident, the Petrol Tanker was being driven by Sushil Kumar (driver) engaged by the respondent No. 2 – M/s Trishul Bottlers, Sikandpur, Bishnah. 04. The accident came to take place on 27.01.2011 on the National Highway at Dayalachak in district Kathua at 7:45 a.m. falling in the jurisdiction of the Police Station Hiranagar. The appellants’ son Kapil Gupta was driving a Car (Tata Indica) No. JK02AD-6849 with his sister, namely, Ruchi Gupta also travelling along when the Car came to be hit by rashly and negligently driven Petrol Tanker No. JK02Q-9270 causing the death of Kapil Gupta and injuries to his sister – Ruchi Gupta. 05. At the time of his death, the deceased Kapil Gupta was 23 years of age and was a law student in his final year thereby leaving appellants with an irreparable loss of their sole son having a bright future ahead. 06. The appellants in their claim petition on file No. 14580/Claim instituted on 19.02.2011 claimed compensation of an amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs). 07. MACT, Jammu came to hold the cause of accident on account of negligent and rash driving of the Petrol Tanker 3 Mac App No. 19/2021 No. JK02Q-9270. MACT, Jammu also reckoned the fact of the offending vehicle being duly insured by the respondent No. 1 and, thus, rendering the respondent No. 1 liable for indemnification of the respondent No. 2 – the owner of the offending Petrol Tanker in the matter of payment of compensation and, thus, came to place the onus to discharge payment of compensation on the respondent No. 1 in favour of the appellants. 08. For the purpose of computing compensation payable in favour of the appellants for loss of their son, MACT, Jammu came to act upon the fact that the deceased was a student pursuing his LLB course having completed seven semesters of the course and being very good in his academics having a bright future. Given the fact that deceased was yet to enter earning phase of his life, as such, MACT, Jammu came to attribute a notional income to deceased and that being Rs. 20,000/- per month which annually computed to be Rs. 2,40,000/- to which 40% of future prospects came to be added to make the annual income by reference to the date of death of Kapil Gupta to be Rs. 3,36,000/- out of which 50% was deducted on account of the deceased being a bachelor leaving annual loss of dependency of the appellants for Rs. 1,68,000/- against which a maximum multiplier of 18 was applied to compute the compensation payable to be Rs. 30,24,000/- in favour of the appellants. 09. This compensation amount came to be joined by addition of compensation on account of loss of consortium at 4 Mac App No. 19/2021 Rs. 80,000/-, loss of estate at Rs. 15,000/- and funeral expenses of Rs. 15,000/- thereby aggregating the compensation to Rs. 31,34,000/-. 10. This Court has no factual reason to hold that the appellants have not been compensated justly by MACT, Jammu from whatsoever aspect the grant of compensation in their favour under respective heads be considered. The very fact that MACT, Jammu pressed into service multiplier of 18 by reference to the age of the deceased and not by reference to the age of the appellants as being the claimants, as otherwise it was supposed to be, this Court is of the confirmed judgment that MACT, Jammu while granting compensation in favour of the appellants was bearing a full sympathetic concern towards the appellants for the sad loss suffered by them in the death of their sole young son and thereby to ensure that they are compensated to the maximum possible extent although no amount of compensation whatsoever even if taken to any exaggerated extent can substitute and supplement the loss suffered by the appellants. That is what is the name of Life is and the losses and tragedies related therewith through which the mankind is fated to suffer and bear with. 11. In arriving at the said calculation of compensation, MACT Jammu came to bear in mind the case law of “Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi vs Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma & Anr.” [2014 (8) Supreme 60], “National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Pranay Sethi & Ors.” [2017 (13) Scale 12] and 5 Mac App No. 19/2021 “Sarla Verma & Ors. vs Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.” [2009 (6) SCC 121]. 12. The compensation awarded in favour of the appellants was to bear interest but MACT, Jammu has inadvertently omitted in mentioning the same which leaves a scope for intervention to said extent in this appeal. 13. Therefore, this Court while upholding the quantum of compensation of Rs. 31,34,000/- awarded in favour of the appellants, remands the matter back to MACT, Jammu for the purpose of awarding interest component on the awarded compensation and, accordingly, the said interest component would become part of the compensation so awarded in favour of the appellants. 14. To this extent, the appeal is allowed and MACT, Jammu is directed to adjudicate the interest component payable on the amount of compensation of Rs. 31,34,000/- in favour of the appellants within a period of two months from the date of certified copy of this judgment being produced by the appellants before the MACT, Jammu whereupon the respondent No. 1 i.e., Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. be put to notice for its response in the matter. 15. Disposed of. (RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE JAMMU 03.02.2025 Bunty Whether the judgment is speaking: Yes/No Whether the judgment is reportable: Yes/No Bunty Kumar 2025.02.10 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document