Case at a Glance
A Senior Accounts Officer of the Assam State Transport Corporation died on 22 November 2010 when a truck hit the car he was travelling in at Mawmang. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup (M) awarded his widow and children ₹32,27,696 with 6% interest from the date evidence was adduced. On the family’s appeal, the Gauhati High Court rejected the plea to add dearness allowance to his income, since his salary statement showed none, but held that interest should be 9% a year and should run from the date of filing of the claim petition. The insurer was directed to pay the balance within 45 days.
On 22 November 2010, a truck (AS-01-BC-7881) hit an Alto car at Mawmang that was carrying the deceased and four others from Silchar to Guwahati. The deceased was a Senior Accounts Officer with the Assam State Transport Corporation, drawing a monthly salary of ₹22,380. His widow and two children claimed ₹40,00,000. The truck’s insurer admitted cover but disputed the income, the accident and the amount claimed; the car owner blamed the truck driver.
The Tribunal found the accident and the truck driver’s negligence proved and awarded ₹32,27,696: ₹29,97,696 for loss of dependency (₹2,30,592 × multiplier 13), ₹1,00,000 for loss of consortium, ₹1,00,000 for loss of love and affection, ₹25,000 for funeral expenses and ₹5,000 for loss of estate, with 6% interest from the date of adducing evidence. The family appealed, arguing that dearness allowance had been ignored and that interest should be 9% from the date of filing the claim.
The Key Question Before the Court
Should the family get more on account of dearness allowance, and from what date and at what rate should interest on the award run?
No Extra DA, but Interest Must Run From the Claim Date
On income, the Court went by the salary statement (Ext. 10), which showed ₹22,380 with no separate dearness allowance. A projected salary statement for December 2010 to June 2013 was, the Court said, based “on a speculation if the deceased would have been alive”, and “the documentary evidence is contrary to the aforesaid prayer for enhancement.” The plea for higher income was therefore rejected.
On interest, applying Narendra Singh v. Nishant Sharma and Puttamma v. K.L. Narayana Reddy, (2013) 12 SC CK 0055, the Court held that the “rate of interest should be 9% per annum and not 6% per annum.” It also held that interest must run from the date of filing of the claim petition, as there was nothing to show the claimants had delayed the proceedings. The Court noted that National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 10 SC CK 0044 does not provide a separate head for love and affection, but treated it as akin to consortium and did not disturb those awards; nor did it adjust the funeral and estate amounts, since that would make no substantial difference.
What the Court Actually Held
- Dearness allowance could not be added because the salary statement showed none and the projected salary statement was speculative.
- Interest on the compensation was enhanced from 6% to 9% per annum.
- Interest runs from the date of filing of the claim petition, not from the date of adducing evidence, as the claimants did not delay the proceedings.
- All other parts of the award stand; United India Insurance Co. Ltd. must pay the balance within 45 days, failing which further interest at 9% will apply.
Why This Judgment Matters
- In old accident claims the interest component can be substantial. Moving the start date back to the filing of the claim and raising the rate can add significantly to what a family receives.
- It confirms that claimants should not lose interest for the years a case takes in the Tribunal when they are not responsible for the delay.
- It also shows that income claims must be backed by documents; speculative salary projections will not be accepted.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Claimants
- Ask for interest from the date of filing the claim petition, and object if the Tribunal picks a later date without reason.
- Prove income with salary statements that show every component, including any dearness allowance.
- Keep records showing that delays in the case were not caused by you.
For Counsel
- Cite Narendra Singh v. Nishant Sharma and Puttamma v. K.L. Narayana Reddy for 9% interest in MACT appeals.
- An appeal limited to interest and income heads can still yield a meaningful increase in long-pending cases.
- Speculative projected-salary documents are unlikely to support enhancement.
Key Takeaways
- The family’s claim to add dearness allowance was rejected for want of documentary proof.
- Interest was raised from 6% to 9% per annum.
- Interest now runs from the date of filing of the claim petition.
- The insurer must pay the balance within 45 days.
Frequently Asked Questions
From when does interest on MACT compensation run?
In this case, the Gauhati High Court held that interest runs from the date of filing of the claim petition, not from the date evidence was adduced, because the claimants had not delayed the proceedings.
What rate of interest did the High Court apply?
9% per annum instead of the 6% awarded by the Tribunal, relying on Narendra Singh v. Nishant Sharma and Puttamma v. K.L. Narayana Reddy.
Why was the claim for dearness allowance rejected?
The salary statement showed a monthly salary of ₹22,380 with no separate dearness allowance, and the projected salary statement was held to be speculative.
Conclusion
The appeal did not change the compensation itself, but it changed how much the family will actually receive. In a case running since 2011, interest at 9% from the date of the claim petition makes a real difference, and the Court saw no reason to make the family bear the cost of the time the case took.
Practical takeaway: In motor accident claims, check the interest rate and its start date in the award; where claimants did not cause the delay, interest from the date of filing can be sought on appeal.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com