Uttaranchal Transport Corporation Ltd. v. Smt. Vimla Devi and Ors.

E submitted that there was no basis indicated for taking the income at Rs.36,000/- p.a .. On surmises the High Court came to the J conclusion that the claim could have earned at Rs.36,000/- p.a. -t / There was no basis for coming to such a conclusion. It was also submitted that the multiplier adopted is high. 6. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondents in spite of service of notice. 7. There were two methods adopted to determine and for calculation of compensation in fatal accident actions. The first ,, ~ multiplier method mentioned in Davies v. Powell Duffregn G Associated Collieries Ltd. (1942 AC 601) and the second in Nance v. British Columbia Electric Railway Co. Ltd. (1951 (2) All ER 448). 8. The multiplier method involves the ascertainment of the ""- A loss bf dependency or the multiplicand having regard to the _.~ circumstances of the case and capitalizing the multiplicand by an appropriate multiplier. The choice of the multiplier is determined by the age of the deceased (or that of the claimants whichever is higher) and by the calculation as to what .capital B sum, if invested at a rate of interest appropriate to a stable economy, would yield the multiplicand by way of annual interest. In ascertaining this, regard should also be had to the fact that ultimately the capital sum should also be consumed-up over the " period for which the dependency is expected to last. i.., c 9. The considerations generally relevant in the selection of multiplicand and multiplier were adverted to by lord Diplock in his speech in Mallett v. Mc Mong le (1969 (2) All ER 178) where the deceased was aged 25 and left behind his widow of about the same age and three minor children. On the· question of D selection of multiplicand Lord Diplock observed: "'" "The starting point in any estimate of the amount of the ~ 'dependency' is the annual value of the material benefits provided for the dependants out of the earnings of the ~eceased at the date of his death. But. ... there are rnany factors which might have led to variations up or down in the future. His earnings might have increased and with them the amount provided by him for his dependants. They \ might have diminished with a recession in trade ()t he · -\.- might have had spells of unemployment. As his children F grew up and became independent the proportion of his earnings spent on his dependants would have been likely to fall. But in considering the effect to be given in the award of damages to possible variations in the dependency tbere are two factors to be borne in mind. G The first is that the more remote in the future is the anticipated change the less confidence there can be in ~..,.. the chances of its occurring and the smaller the allowan~e to be made for it in the assessment. The second is that as a matter of the arithmetic of the calculation of present H value, the later the change takes place the less will be its UTTARANCHAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD. V. 517 SMT. VIMLA DEVI AND ORS. [DR ARIJIT PASAYAT J.] ~·+- effect upon the total award of damages. Thus at interest A rates of 4- 1/2% the present value of an annuity for 20 years of which the first ten years are at $ 100 per annum and the second ten years at$ 200 per annum, is about 12 years' purchase of the arithmetical average annuity of$ 150 per annum, whereas if the first ten years are at $200 B per annum and the second ten years at $ 100 per annum the present value is about 14 years' purchase of the " arithmetical mean of $ 150 per annum. If therefore the chances of variations in the 'dependency' are to be ---' reflected in the multiplicand of which the years' purchase c is the multiplier, variations in the dependency which are not expected to take place until after ten years should have only a relatively small effect in increasing or diminishing the 'dependency' used for the purpose of assessing the damages." D ~ 10. In regard to the choice of the multiplicand, Halsbury's ;.• Laws of England in vol. 34, para 98 states the principle thus: "98. Assessment of damages under the Fatal Accident Act, 1976 - The courts have evolved a method for E calculating the amount of pecuniary benefit that dependants could reasonably expect to have received from the deceased in the future. First the annual value to the J dependants of those benefits (the multiplicand) is ~ assessed. In the ordinary case of the death of a wage- earner that figure is arrived at by deducting from the wages F the estimated amount of his own personal and living expenses. The assessment is split into two parts. The first part comprises damages for the period between death and G ~ ..... trial. The multiplicand is multiplied by the number of years ' which have elapsed between those two dates. Interest at one-half the short-term investment rate is also awarded on that multiplicand. The second part is damages for the period from the trial onwards. For that period, the number A of years which have based on the number of years th.at the j,. ... expectancy would probably have lasted; central to that calculation is the probable length of the deceased's working life at the date of death." - 11. As to the multiplier, Halsbury states: "However, the multiplier is a figure considerably less than the number of years taken as the duration of the expectancy. Since the dependants can invest their damages, the lump 1' sum award in respect of future loss must be discounted to c reflect their receipt of interest on invested funds, the intention being that the dependants will each year draw interest and some capital (the interest element decreasing and the capital drawings increasing with the passage of years}, so that they are compensated each year for their D annual loss, and the fund will be exhausted at the age which the court assesses to be the correct age, having .., regard to all contingencies. The contingencies of life such ·~ as illness, disability and unemployment have to be taken into account. Actuarial evidence is admissible, but the courts do not encourage such evidence. The calculation depends on selecting an assumed rate of interest. In practice about 4 or 5 per cent is selected, and inflation is disregarded. It is assumed that the return on fixed interest bearing securities is so much higher than 4 to 5 per cent \ that rough and ready allowance for inflation is thereby ~ F made. The multiplier may be increased where the plaintiff is a high tax payer. The multiplicand is based on the rate of wages at the date of trial. No interest is allowed on the total figure." G 12. In both General Manager, Kerala State Road Transgort Corgoration, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors. ~..-4 (1994 (2) SCC 176) and U.P. State Road Transgort CorQoration And Othersv. Trilok Chandra arid Ors. (1996 (4) SCC 362) the multiplier appears to have been adopted by this Court taking H note of the prevalent banking rate of interest. UTTARANCHAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD. V. 519 SMT. VIMLA DEVI AND ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT J.] ,. ,., 13. In fact in Trilok Chand's case (supra), after reference A to Second Schedule to the Act, it was noticed that the same ' suffers from many defects. It was pointed out that the same is to .. serve as a guide, but cannot be said to be invariable ready I reckoner. However, the appropriate highest multiplier was held ~ to be 18. The highest multiplier has to be for the age group of B 21 years to 25 years when an ordinary Indian Citizen starts independently earning and the lowest would be in respect of a ,.,. person in the age group of 60 to 70, which is the normal retirement age. 14. Considering the age of the deceased the multiplier as c adopted appears to be on higher side. 15. Keeping in view the parameters indicated above it would be appropriate to fix the multiplier at 10 and the rate of interest @6% p.a .. The MACT shall work out the entitlement on D ·~ the aforesaid basis. 1 16. No basis has been indicated by the High Court for its presumptuous conclusion that the deceased could have earned Rs.36,000/- p.a. Taking the overall view of the matter including type of business of the deceased, we fix the compensation at E Rs.2,00,000/- payable with interest@6% from the date of claim. )' 17. It is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- has been deposited in terms of the order ·f of this Court dated 10.8.2007. The balance amount shall be deposited in the concerned MACT within a period of 8 weeks. F The withdrawal of the amount in the fixed deposit shall be fixed by the MACT taking into account the relevant aspects. 18. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. G ........ -t B.B.B. Appeal disposed of.