mact article
DESCRIPTION
sarla verma caseTRANSCRIPT
MACT-Position after Sarla Verma case
With the ever increasing number of cars and the modernisation of society, the rate of motor
accidents is going up with every passing day. While some are fortunate enough to escape the
ordeal, many others lose their lives and leave back families to suffer the agony for the rest of
their lives. Furthermore, the tribunal which has been set up to claim compensation for the
victims, is in fact a detriment which increases the agony of the family. For years, the case
remains sub judice and the mental and physical sufferings make it a harrowing experience for the
claimants who are already distressed by the loss of their dear ones. Over the years, obscurity has
prevailed in Supreme Court's Judgments regarding computation of compensation.
Finally, Considering the lack of uniformity and consistency in awarding compensation by the
MACTs, the Supreme Court conclusively settled the question of determining quantum in the
seminal decision of Smt. Sarla Verma and Ors Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr,
(2009) 6 SCC 121.
Sarla Verma therefore clarifies the well entrenched formula for determining the correct
compensation, a simple task which does not involve complicated questions of fact or law. Yet
cases which could be easily and conclusively decided in a matter of minutes are pending disposal
for decades. Further, the sheer number of such cases being filed in the Higher Judiciary is so
high that disposal never catches up with filing. Even so, admitting such cases for years leads to
completely defeating the rights of the victims as the enormous time delays nullify whatever
benefits enhanced compensation may have.
Although Sarla Verma has rationalised and simplified the computation of MACT claims, it is
silent upon one crucial point of consideration. It nowhere specifies whether the age of claimants
is to be considered while deciding compensation or not. Prior to the Sarla Verma Judgment,
Supreme Court took an affirmative view on this in General Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C vs
Susamma Thomas, 1994 SCC (2) 176 and U.P State Road Transport Corporation ltd v.
Trilok Chandra and ors, (1996) 4 SCC 362. In these cases it went on to say that, the choice of
the multiplier is determined by the age of the deceased ( or that of the claimants whichever is
higher) and that selection of multiplier cannot in all cases be solely dependent on the age of
deceased. But after the Sarla Verma Judgment, this issue has again been sidelined and courts are
awarding hefty compensations without considering the age of claimants. Age of claimants is a
factor which should necessarily be considered while awarding compensations because where the
age of dependents is higher than that of the deceased, the multiplier should be lesser. Courts have
taken an ignorant view of this relevant factor and consequently, the accused are being made to
pay exorbitant compensations. However, in 2010, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shakti Devi v.
New India insurance co ltd, (2010) 14 SCC 475 has specifically held that where the age of the
claimant is higher than the age of the deceased, the age of the claimant and not the age of the
deceased has to be taken into account for capitalisation of the loss of dependancy. Further, the
Punjab and Haryana High court has recently held in Ralla Singh v. Balwant Singh and Ors
(2013) that age of claimants is a relevant factor to determine the multiplier to be applied to arrive
at the loss of dependancy.