2026 INSC 653 Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 1 of 15

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8706 OF 2026

[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CIVIL) NO. 2360 OF 2023]

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

KALU RAM AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENT(S)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO.8707 OF 2026

[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CIVIL) NO. 14094 OF 2023]

J U D G M E N T

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. These cross-appeals arise out of the common judgment dated

08.08.2022 passed by the High Court of Delhi

1

in MAC.APP. No. 79 of 2018

and MAC.APP. No. 702 of 2018, whereby the High Court dismissed the

appeals preferred by the insurer as well as the claimants and affirmed the

award dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

2

,

Saket Courts, New Delhi, in Suit No. 3059 of 2016.

1

For short, ‘High Court’

2

For short, ‘Tribunal’

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 2 of 15

3. The case arises out of a motor vehicular accident that occurred in the

early hours of 11.06.2013. The deceased, Akash Kumar, aged about 20 years,

was travelling in a Wagon-R car bearing registration No. DL-6CH-6143, driven

by his roommate, Nikhil Kumar Jain. At about 3:00 a.m., when the vehicle

reached near Andrews Ganj Bus Stop on the BRT Corridor, Delhi, it collided

with a truck bearing registration No. HR-55B-0379.

4. According to the claimants, the truck had been stationed in the middle

of the road without any parking lights, indicators, reflectors or warning signs

and, owing to the darkness and absence of any cautionary indication, it was

not visible to the driver of the car. As a result of the collision, Akash Kumar

sustained fatal injuries and succumbed thereto, while Nikhil Kumar Jain also

suffered injuries. In connection with the accident, FIR No. 90n of 2013 came

to be registered at Police Station Defence Colony and, upon investigation, a

charge-sheet was filed against the truck driver under Sections 279, 337 and

304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

3

.

5. A Detailed Accident Report

4

came to be instituted before the Tribunal

on 11.09.2013. Thereafter, the parents of the deceased instituted a claim

petition under Sections 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

5

seeking

compensation on account of the untimely death of their son. It was pleaded

that the deceased was a bachelor aged 20 years, pursuing Chartered

Accountancy

6

(Final), and undergoing articleship with M/s ASA & Associates.

3

For short, ‘IPC’

4

Fort short, ‘DAR’

5

For short, ‘MV Act’

6

For short, ‘CA’

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 3 of 15

According to the claimants, besides his articleship stipend between Rs.

8,000/- to Rs 11,000/-, the deceased was also earning approximately Rs.

25,000/- from private tuition and had bright professional prospects, which

deserved due consideration while assessing compensation.

6. The claim petition was contested by the driver, owner and insurer of the

offending truck. Their defence was that the truck had suffered puncture in its

rear tyres and had been parked on the extreme left side of the road, and that

the accident occurred solely due to rash and negligent driving of the Wagon-

R, which rammed into the truck from behind. The insurer, while admitting

the insurance coverage of the offending vehicle, denied liability and supported

the plea that negligence was attributable to the driver of the car.

7. In support of the claim, the claimants examined Nikhil Kumar Jain, the

driver of the Wagon-R and an injured eyewitness to the occurrence. He

deposed that the truck had been stationed on the road without indicators,

reflectors or any warning signs and that the street lights on the road were also

not functional at the relevant time, rendering the vehicle practically invisible.

The Tribunal also considered the site photographs and the material collected

during investigation. Significantly, neither the truck driver nor the owner

entered the witness box to rebut the evidence led by the claimants.

8. Upon appreciation of the evidence on record, the Tribunal recorded a

finding that the accident had occurred due to the negligence of the truck

driver in leaving the vehicle stationed on the road without adequate warning

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 4 of 15

or precautionary measures. The Tribunal rejected the plea that the driver of

the Wagon-R was negligent or contributorily negligent.

9. On the question of compensation, the Tribunal examined the evidence

led by the claimants concerning the educational and professional profile of

the deceased. Apart from the testimony of the claimants themselves, the

Tribunal also examined Dr. Surender Pal (PW-3), Joint Director of CA Institute

who had stated that students after completing CA got salaries between 1 to 2

lakhs per month and average salary offered to CA was around Rs 7.37 Lakhs

during campus placement in year 2013-2014. The Tribunal also took note of

the fact that the deceased was pursuing CA Final and undergoing articleship

with M/s ASA & Associates. Upon appreciation of such evidence, the Tribunal

noted that the deceased had already reached the final stage of a professional

course and was at the threshold of entering the profession. Though the actual

stipend received by the deceased was placed on record as in the range of Rs.

3,595/- to Rs. 14,410/- per month, the Tribunal considered his future

professional prospects and assessed his income at Rs. 55,500/- per month

on the basis of likely earnings of an entry-level Group-A officer, having regard

to his educational and professional trajectory. After making deductions

towards income tax and personal expenses, adding future prospects of 50%

and applying the multiplier of 18, as well as providing under various

conventional heads, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.

81,21,900/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 5 of 15

of the DAR, fastening the liability upon the insurer by award dated

30.11.2017. The distribution of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under

various heads is reflected in table below:

HEADS MACT

Monthly Income Rs. 55,500/-

Income Tax deduction of

10%

Rs 55,500 – 10% of Rs 55,500 = Rs

49,950/-

Income after future

prospects of 50%

Rs 49,950 + 50% of Rs 49,950 = Rs

74,925/-

Deduction (1/2th for two

claimants)

Rs 74,925/2 = Rs 37,462.5/-

Multiplier 18

Loss of dependency Rs 37,462.5 * 18 * 12 = Rs 80,91,900/-

Loss of Estate Rs 15,000/-

Funeral Expenses Rs 15,000/-

TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 81,21,900/-

10. Aggrieved by the said award, the insurer preferred MAC.APP. No. 79 of

2018 before the High Court under Section 173 of the MV Act, principally

contending that the Tribunal erred in fastening negligence upon the truck

driver and in assessing the income of th e deceased on hypothetical

considerations, resulting in an excessive award. The claimants, on the other

hand, preferred MAC.APP. No. 702 of 2018 seeking enhancement of

compensation on the ground that the future earning potential of the deceased

had not been adequately assessed.

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 6 of 15

11. Both appeals were heard together and came to be dismissed by the High

Court by the impugned common judgment dated 08.08.2022. The High Court

affirmed the finding of the Tribunal that the truck had been negligently

stationed on the road without warning indicators and upheld the conclusion

that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the Wagon-R driver.

The High Court also found the assessment of compensation to be just and

reasonable and, consequently, maintained the award in its entirety.

12. It is in these circumstances that the insurer has approached this Court

assailing the concurrent findings on negligence and the quantum of

compensation, whereas the claimants seek enhancement of the compensation

awarded, giving rise to the present cross-appeals for consideration.

13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the

material on record, the controversy in the present cross-appeals lies in a

narrow compass. The insurer questions the concurrent finding of negligence

returned by the Tribunal and affirmed by the High Court, besides assailing

the quantum of compensation awarded. The claimants, on the other hand,

seek enhancement of compensation on the ground that the future earning

potential of the deceased was not adequately assessed and that compensation

under the conventional heads has not been fully granted.

14. Insofar as the question of negligence is concerned, we find no reason to

take a view different from that concurrently taken by the Tribunal and the

High Court. The evidence on record, particularly the testimony of Nikhil

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 7 of 15

Kumar Jain, who himself was an injured eyewitness to the occurrence,

establishes that the offending truck had been stationed on the road without

parking lights, indicators, reflectors or any cautionary signs. The accident

having occurred at about 3:00 a.m., the absence of such warning measures

assumes significance. The said testimony has remained materially unshaken.

15. The defence set up by the driver and owner of the offending truck was

that the vehicle had suffered puncture in its rear tyres and had been stationed

on the extreme left side of the road. However, neither the driver nor the owner

entered the witness box to substantiate such plea. In the absence of any

evidence from the side of the truck driver, the Tribunal was justified in

drawing an adverse inference against them. The site photographs and the

attendant circumstances also do not support the case that the truck had been

stationed with due care and caution.

16. The mere fact that the Wagon-R collided with the truck from behind

cannot, by itself, lead to an inference of negligence on the part of its driver.

The issue of negligence has to be examined in the totality of circumstances. A

stationary vehicle occupying the road in the dead of night without any

warning indication poses an evident hazard to road users. The Tribunal and

the High Court have, on appreciation of the evidence, rightly concluded that

the proximate cause of the accident was the negligent act of the truck driver

in leaving the vehicle unattended on the road without adequate precautionary

measures.

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 8 of 15

17. The submission on behalf of the insurer that the accident was

occasioned due to rash and negligent driving of the Wagon-R and that the

case was one of contributory negligence does not merit acceptance. Save and

except the plea raised in the written statement, no evidence worth the name

has been adduced to establish negligence on the part of the driver of the

Wagon-R. In the absence of cogent material, the plea of contributory

negligence cannot be accepted on mere conjecture.

18. It is well settled that this Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article

136 of the Constitution of India, does not ordinarily interfere with concurrent

findings of fact unless such findings are shown to be perverse, manifestly

erroneous or based on no evidence. We find none of these infirmities in the

present case. The challenge laid by the insurer to the finding of negligence

therefore deserves to fail.

19. Turning to the issue of quantum, we find that the Tribunal took due

notice of the educational advancement of the deceased, who was pursuing CA

(Final) and undergoing articleship at the relevant time. The actual stipend

received by the deceased during articleship was brought on record as in the

range of Rs. 3,595/- to Rs. 14,410/- per month. However, instead of confining

the assessment to the proved income, the Tribunal proceeded to determine

the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 55,500/- by taking into account

his educational progression, professional prospects and likely career

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 9 of 15

advancement. The High Court, upon reappreciation, found such methodology

to be fair and reasonable.

20. Upon examining the methodology adopted by the Tribunal in computing

compensation, as affirmed by the High Court, we find that while determining

the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 55,500/-, the Tribunal had already

departed from the actual stipend proved on record and proceeded to assess

the income by taking into account the deceased’s professional prospects and

educational progression, his imminent entry into the profession of CA and the

likely increase in earning capacity attendant thereto. In other words, the

multiplicand itself was arrived at on a forward-looking assessment of the

deceased’s professional future. In National Insurance Company Limited vs.

Pranay Sethi and Others

7

, this Court has explained that the addition

towards future prospects is intended to be made to the established income of

the deceased so as to account for the normal rise in income over time, and

even in the case of self-employed or fixed-salary individuals, such addition is

structured as a standardised percentage over the proven income. In the

present case, apart from this aspect of calculation of future income of

deceased, a further addition of 50% towards future prospects on the same

foundation has been awarded by the Tribunal . The adjudication of

compensation in the present matter cannot be viewed in sterile mathematical

terms alone detached from human element underlying such claims. The case

7

(2017) 16 SCC 680 at Para 54 to 57

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 10 of 15

before us concerns the loss of a young life with promising professional

potential, and the determination of compensation under the MV Act is

ultimately guided by the principle of awarding ‘just compensation’. This

principle is not one of exact mathematical equivalence, rather it is an attempt

by the law to provide a measure of solace, within human limitations, to those

who have suffered an irreparable loss. In the present case, a young student

has died on the threshold of a professional career, whose life and potential

stand extinguished forever. The claimants are parents who lost their young

son in an accident that occurred in the year 2013 and the award was rendered

by the Tribunal in 2017. For nearly a decade, the compensation determined

by the Tribunal and affirmed by the High Court has held the field.

21. Though this Court undoubtedly possesses the jurisdiction to interfere

where computation results in manifest excess or legal infirmity, the exercise

of such power must ultimately subserve the ends of justice. In the facts of the

present case, we are of the considered view that reducing the compensation

payable to the claimants at this stage on account of what is essentially a

technical overlap in the methodology adopted by the Tribunal would not

advance the cause of substantive justice. The loss suffered by the parents of

the deceased cannot be measured with arithmetical precision, and the

compensation awarded, viewed holistically, cannot be said to transgress the

bounds of ‘just compensation’ under the MV Act. The beneficial character of

the legislation, the long passage of time since the accident, the concurrent

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 11 of 15

assessment made by the Tribunal and the High Court, and the impossibility

of placing a precise monetary value upon the loss of a young life, together

persuade us not to disturb the compensation awarded towards loss of

dependency. Viewed holistically, we are of the considered view that no

interference is called for with the compensation awarded towards loss of

dependency.

22. It is no doubt true, as we have emphasised in the preceding paragraphs,

that the determination of compensation under the MV Act is guided by the

principle of awarding ‘just compensation’, which must account for the future

prospects of the deceased. At the same time, such determination cannot travel

into the realm of conjecture. In the present case, while there was evidence of

the stipend being earned by the deceased, no cogent material was placed on

record to establish the alleged income from private tuition. Equally, the

assertion of the claimants that the deceased would certainly qualify as a

Chartered Accountant and thereafter earn substantially higher income

remains a matter of future uncertainty. Compensation cannot be founded on

assumptions of assured professional success or on salary benchmar ks of

unrelated successful professionals.

23. In fact, as stated earlier, the Tribunal has already taken an

exceptionally liberal and beneficial view in favour of the claimants by not

restricting the assessment to the actual proved income and by adopting a

substantially enhanced benchmark reflective of the deceased’s future earning

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 12 of 15

potential. Such determination was not arrived at in vacuum , rather the

Tribunal had examined the oral and documentary evidence led by the

claimants, including the testimony of Dr. Surender Pal (PW-3), Joint Director,

along with other witnesses, while assessing the future earning potential of the

deceased. That exercise, in our considered view, sufficiently accounts for the

professional promise of the deceased and leaves no room for further

enhancement on the aspect of loss of dependency. We say so especially on the

peculiar facts of this case. Any further increase on that basis would cease to

be compensatory and would enter the impermissible domain of speculation.

At the same time, while it has been argued by the insurer that the

compensation so assessed appears to be on the higher side considering that

the accident took place in 2013, we are not inclined to interfere with the same

by reducing the award under any heads. The life of a young individual and

the loss suffered by his family cannot be measured in precise monetary terms,

and the determination of ‘just compensation’ under the MV Act does not admit

of mathematical exactitude.

24. However, upon examining the award of the Tribunal, as affirmed by the

High Court, we find that no amount has been awarded under the conventional

head of consortium. In Pranay Sethi (supra), this Court recognised

consortium as one of the conventional heads under which compensation is

required to be awarded in cases of death.

8

The said principle has thereafter

8

As per Para 46, 52 and 59.8 of Pranay Sethi judgment.

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 13 of 15

been explained and expanded by this Court in Magma General Insurance

Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others

9

to

include the entitlement of parents in the case of death of an unmarried son

or daughter under the head of ‘filial consortium’.

25. The MV Act being a beneficial legislation, the duty of the Court is to

ensure that just compensation is awarded, even if a legitimate conventional

head has been omitted by the courts below. In the facts of the present case,

the claimants, being the parents of the deceased unmarried son, are entitled

to compensation under the head of ‘filial consortium’. The omission of the

Tribunal and the High Court in this regard requires correction.

26. Accordingly, in addition to the compensation already awarded, the

claimants shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 40,000/- each towards filial

consortium, in terms of the principles, governing compensation under the

conventional heads, as laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra).

27. In view of the foregoing discussion, we reach to the following conclusion:

a) The Appeal preferred by the insurer is dismissed.

b) The Appeal preferred by the claimants is partly allowed to the

limited extent indicated above. Accordingly, the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal, as affirmed by the High Court, shall stand

enhanced by an amount of Rs. 80,000/- towards filial consortium,

9

(2018) 18 SCC 130 at Para 21 to 24

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 14 of 15

payable to the claimants in equal measure, together with interest at

the rate awarded by the Tribunal.

28. Consequently, in terms of the findings recorded hereinabove, the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal, as affirmed by the High Court, stands

modified. The revised computation of compensation is set out hereunder:

HEADS MACT HIGH

COURT

THIS

COURT

Monthly Income Rs. 55,500/-

Upheld

the

award of

MACT

Confirmed

with further

addition as

below

Income Tax

deduction of 10%

Rs 55,500 – 10%

of Rs 55,500 = Rs

49,950/-

Income after future

prospects of 50%

Rs 49,950 + 50%

of Rs 49,950 = Rs

74,925/-

Deduction (1/2th

for two claimants)

Rs 74,925/2 = Rs

37,462.5/-

Multiplier 18

Loss of dependency Rs 37,462.5 x 18 *

12 = Rs

80,91,900/-

Loss of Estate Rs 15,000/-

Funeral Expenses Rs 15,000/-

Loss of Filial

Consortium

(Parents/Claimants)

Not considered Rs 40,000 x 2

= Rs 80,000/-

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

Rs. 81,21,900/- Rs

82,01,900/-

Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No. 2360 of 2023 etc. Page 15 of 15

29. The amount awarded under the conventional heads, namely, loss of

consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, should be enhanced at the

rate of 10% in every three years.

10

30. Accordingly, the total compensation payable to the claimants shall

stand enhanced from Rs. 81,21,900/- to Rs. 82,01,900/- along with interest

in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The insurer shall deposit the enhanced

amount before the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today.

31. The Appeals are decided in the above terms.

………………………………………J.

(PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA)

………………………………………J.

(N.V. ANJARIA)

NEW DELHI;

JUNE 23, 2026.

10

As per Para 59.8 of Pranay Sethi judgment.