Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Judgement By: Supreme Court of India.

Judge/Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.

Facts

This case relates to a road accident in which D. Velu, a 37-year-old driver, died due to the negligent driving of a tanker lorry. His wife, two minor children, and parents filed a claim for compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal fixed his monthly income at ₹6,000 and did not add any amount for future prospects. 

The High Court increased the income to ₹7,000 but still refused to grant future prospects and separately awarded money for “loss of love and affection.” The family then approached the Supreme Court.

Key Legal Provisions

Sections 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Issues Raised

Whether the deceased’s income was correctly assessed and whether future prospects should have been added.

Whether compensation for “loss of love and affection” can be given separately.

Arguments of the Case

The family argued that proper income proof was ignored and future prospects were wrongly denied. The insurer argued that separate compensation for love and affection is not allowed under law.

Judgement

The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal. It fixed the income at ₹10,000 per month, added 40% for future prospects, and held that “loss of love and affection” cannot be awarded separately as it is included under loss of consortium. The compensation amount was increased.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.