ASSESSMENT OF INCOME OF DECEASED EMPLOYED IN FOREIGN COUNTRY IN CASE OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS.

ASSESSMENT OF INCOME OF DECEASED  EMPLOYED IN FOREIGN COUNTRY IN CASE OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS.

In motor accidents claims cases when the income of the deceased who was working in foreign country before accident was proved thro’ cogent evidence, it can be taken up for calculating loss of income. This aspect has been clearly discussed by apex court in 2020(2) TNMAC 1 (SC)  united india insurance co. ltd., VS Satinder kaur @ Satwinder kaur & others.

It has been discussed as under.                

Main aspects discussed are:

·        Compensation – determination in fatal cases – principles governing

·        Income – Assessment of when deceased employed in foreign countries

·        Personal expenses – deduction towards – 50% deducted in view of cost of living in foreign country

·        Loss of consortium – Rs.40,000/ awarded as spousal consortium to wife and Rs.1,20,000 to  3 children as parental consortium.

The deceased – satpal singh was residing in doha, Qatar since 1984. The employment contract form of the deceased dated 21.8.1984 revealed that he was engaged as a labourer initially for a period of 1 year on a salary of Rs.750 qatari riyal p.m and continued to live in Qatar where he was employed, till he passed away in a motor vehicle accident in india in 1998.

On 18/11/1998, he was riding a scoter with his wife as a pillion rider, when he met with an accident with a maruti car bearing regn.no. CH – 01 – M 6284 coming from the opposite direction.

FIR was lodged under sec.304 – A,279,337,427 IPCC against the driver and owner of the offending car.

The widow of the deceased on behalf of herself and her 3 minor children filed acclaim petition for compensation on the death of her husband. The claimants prayed for compensation of  50 lacs.

The claimants filed a copy of the employment contract form dated 10.7.1984 certified by Indian embassy at doha, which records the engagement of the deceased as a labourer by the firm Ali AL Fayyad trading contracting Est., doha on a salary of 750 qatari riyal p.m when he first shifted to Qatar.

The claimants also placed on record a letter, dated 27/6/1997 purported to hae been issued by his employer – the high speed group to the counselor, new Zealand consulate for issuance of viza. It was stated that the general manager of their company, Mr. Satpal harbans singh was intending to spend his annual vacation during june – August 1997 in new Zealand, and had been employed by this organization since 1984, and was drawing a salary of 6700 riyal pm.

It is relevant to note that this letter was not attested by the Indian embassy at doha.

The claimants placed on record the passport of the deceased, which reveals his date of birth as 10/8/1958. The deceased was a little over 40 years of age at the time of accident.

The passport entry reveal frequent foreign travel during the period 1986 till 1998 when he expired.

MACT applied the multiplier of 13, since the deceased was a little over 40 years of age at the time of accident.

With respect to the income of the deceased, the MACT held that the letter dated 27/6/1997 issued by the high speed group, had not been proved by the claimants, nor was it attested by the Indian embassy at doha, and therefre refused to take it into consideration.

The MACT assumed that the income of the deceased satpal singh should be assessed just as an ordinary skilled worker, and assessed his income at Rs.4000/pm. The amount of dependency was taken as Rs.2500/pm. X 12 x 13 = 3,90,000/An amount of Rs.10,000/ was awarded towards funeral expenses.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement the claimants filed an appeal before the high court for further enhancement.

With respect to the income of the deceased the high court proceeded on the basis of the letter, dated 27/6/1997 issued by the high speed group, wherein it was stated that satpal singh was working as a general manager, and drawing a salary of 6700 riyal pm. Which would be equivalent to Rs.2,68,000 pm. At the time when the claim was filed.

The high court assessed compensation on the basis of the income at Rs.2,68,000pm. And adopted the multiplier of 12.

The contribution to the family was fixed at 50% of the income, which would approximately be Rs.1,34,000/ pm.

Rs.50,000/ was awarded towards loss of estate, and Rs.10,000/ towards funeral expenses.

On this basis, the total compensation payable to the claimants was computed at Rs.96,78,000/ after making a partial abatement of 50% towards contributory negligence.

The high court held that since 50% of the income was provided to the wife and children, it was not necessary to provide for loss of consortium, loss of love and affection.

Against this the insurer filed an appeal and the claimants also filed an appeal for enhancement.

After perusing the pleadings and the documentary evidence placed on record before the court below, and having considered the oral submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the apex court came to a conclusion that the judgements of both the MACT and the high court are liable to be set aside, and the compensation is required to be awarded in accordance with the law expounded by this court in various decision.

The apex court applied the law laid down in various judgements, to compute the compensation payable to the dependants of the deceased satpal in the present case.

It is pertinent to note that the income of the deceased in 1984 as per his employment contract form dated 21/8/1984 was 750 qatari riyal pm. This document was duly certified by the Indian embassy at doha.

The accident occurred on 18.11.1998, which is  15 years after he shifted to doha. Letter dated 27/6/1997 cannot form the basis of computing the income of the deceased. This letter seems to be suspicious for two grounds. One, As per the employment contract form dated 21/8/1984 certified by the Indian embassy at doha, the deceased was engaged by the firm ali al Fayyad trading contracting est., doha in 1984. The letter, dated 27/6/1997 issued by the high speed group, stated that the deceased was employed with them since 1984.This leads to a serious doubt about the authenticity of the letter. Furthermore, the salary is mentioned in US dollars, rather than Qatari riyal, even though the high speed group is a local company in Qatar.

Second the letter dated 27/6/1997 was addressed to the counselor, New Zealand consulate for a visa to be issued to the deceased for his annual vacation to New Zealand during the period june – august,1997. The passport entries however, do not show that the deceased travelled to New Zealand.

Consequently, the court has serious doubt about the authenticity and veracity of the letter dated 27/6/1997, and decline to make it the basis for computing the income of the deceased at the time of his death.

In the absence of any other evidence being produced by the claimants, the income of the deceased would be required to be computed by taking his base salary at 750 qatari riyal pm. In 1984 as a skilled labourer, as reflected in his employment contract form.

A perusal of passport entries of the deceased reveal that he had continued to remain in employment for  a period of over 14 years in Qatar till he passed away in 1998. He was evidently doing fairly well, since there are numerous entries of foreign travel in his passport during the 14 years of his  stay  in doha. By taking an increment of 10% per annum from 1984 till 1998, the notional income of the deceased could be fixed at 2590 qatari riyal pm., which could be rounded off to 2600 qatari riyal pm. As per the exchange rate prevailing in 1998, 1 qatari riyal is equivalent to 12.41 INR. Accordingly, the income of the deceased would work out to 2600 X 12.41 = Rs.32,266 p.m. ie.Rs.3.87,192 p.a.

Since deceased living in foreign country, in view of high cost of living in foreign country, in view of cost of living in foreign country, 50% of the income may be deducted towards personal expenses.

Contributory negligence on the part of the deceased was also proved.

In the light of aforesaid discussion, the claimants are awarded compensation as follows:

1.	income	Rs.3,87,192 p.a.
2.	Deduction towards personal expenses	50%
3.	Future prospects	30%
4.	Multiplicand	Rs.2,51,675 (3,87,192 – 50% + 30%)
5.	multiplier	15
6.	Loss of dependency	Rs.37,75,125 (2,51,675 x 15)
7.	Funeral expenses	Rs.15,000/
8.	Loss of estate	Rs15,000/
9.	Loss of spousal consortium	Rs.40,000/
10.	Loss of parental consortium to each of 3 children	Rs.1,20,000/
11.	Total compensation	Rs.39,65,125
12.	Deduction on account of contributory negligence	50%
	Total compensation to be paid	Rs.19,82,563/