Calcutta HC Rules Claimant Does Not Need to Prove Negligence

The Calcutta High Court has issued a directive for the West Bengal State Transport Corporation (WBSTC) to pay approximately Rs. 2 lakh in compensation to the family of a minor girl who lost her life in a road accident involving a WBSTC bus back in 2007.

The parents of the victim had approached the Court after the Motor Vehicles Accident Claim Tribunal awarded them only Rs. 15,000 in compensation. They argued that a strict interpretation of Section 163A was necessary and that the negligence of the offending vehicle should be immaterial in such cases. However, the Tribunal proceeded to consider the aspect of negligence.

The petitioners also contended that the notional income of Rs. 30,000 per annum should be taken into account for a minor victim, with a multiplier of 20. Additionally, there should be no deduction for the personal and living expenses of the deceased.

In overturning the Tribunal’s order and recalculating the compensation amount under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, which deals with determining compensation in cases of death or permanent disability, Justice Bivas Pattanayak held the following: “Upon bare reading of the aforesaid provisions, it manifests that, in a proceeding under Section 163A of the Act, claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. However, it is found from the impugned judgment that the learned Tribunal has framed issue that whether the victim died in the motor accident due to rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending vehicle and has also proceeded to decide such issue holding the negligence of the driver. The finding of the learned Tribunal with regard to the aspect of negligence of the driver is not in consonance with the provisions envisaged under Section 163A of the Act and therefore, such finding of the learned Tribunal with regard negligence of the driver in the accident in a proceeding under Section 163A of the Act is liable to be set aside.”

Regarding the calculation of income for the minor victim, the Bench stated that the compensation should be determined based on the structured formula provided in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, as per the application under Section 163A. According to the Second Schedule, a notional income of Rs. 15,000 per annum applies to non-earning individuals. For a victim below the age of 15 involved in a road accident, the multiplier would be 20, as per the Court’s ruling.

On the issue of deduction, the Bench referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Deepal Girishbhai Soni v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and concluded that the compensation determination under Section 163A should be based on the structured formula outlined in the Second Schedule. Therefore, a deduction of 1/3rd of the notional income for personal and living expenses, as provided in the Second Schedule, should be taken into account.

Accordingly, the Court modified the compensation award to align with these considerations.