32 years after woman died in India, Bombay High Court revises payout to over Rs 10 crore based on Dubai income

The Bombay High Court was hearing an appeal filed by Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, challenging the June 2003 award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), which had directed payment of Rs 5.52 crore compensation to the victim’s family.

The court directed the tribunal to recompute the exact compensation payable to the family, taking into consideration the woman’s income at Rs 70,00,000, along with the inclusion of funeral expenses, future prospects and other factors.

Family dependent on victim’s income

• The Bombay High Court noted that the husband of the victim had invoked the family’s rights under the insurance policy by claiming fair and just compensation, though no monetary amount can make up for the lives lost in the tragedy. 
• It noted that the insurer had accepted that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently at the time of the accident. 
• The victim earned an income of 2.9 million dirhams (approximately Rs 2.5 crore) for her work done during 1992–1993, and for the work in May 1994, she earned about 1 million dirhams (approximately Rs 90 lakh), the bench noted. 
• The Bombay High Court also agreed with the submissions of the victim’s family counsel, advocate Hegde, that the mere absence of a formal qualification in interior designing or architecture could not be a ground to discard the victim’s earnings and professional work. 
• The bench noted that there was nothing on record to show that any specific qualification was required for the work undertaken by the victim. 
• The Bombay High Court found no reason to disbelieve or discard the evidence placed on record by the husband concerning the income of the victim. 
• It also pointed out that the insurance company was not able to demonstrate or prove that the husband and the victim’s children were having their own independent source of income and were therefore not dependent on her. 

A trip from Dubai to Mumbai, a tragedy

• The victim, Kavita Sawlani, was born in 1954 and held a Bachelor of Arts Degree. She married in 1975, and between 1975 and 1984, she helped her husband with his office/administrative work. 
• The victim’s husband was a partner at M/s Royal Traders, a firm engaged in importing and selling textiles, and allegedly had annual earnings of 2 million dirhams. They have two children.
• The victim was allegedly working with her husband in the said business, and her contribution was stated to be about 50 per cent of the earnings of her husband, in terms of the certificate from M/s Royal Traders, which was placed on record before the Bombay High Court. 

• Since 1991, it was claimed that the victim was working as a project consultant with Abdulla Abdul Karim Al Arif and received remuneration of 2.9 million dirhams for the period of 12 months from 1993, from her erstwhile employer. 
• The Bombay High Court was apprised that the victim, along with her husband, minor daughter and niece, was travelling from Mumbai to Shirdi in a rented car on July 3, 1994, when the vehicle collided head-on with a truck travelling in the opposite direction, near Bhiwandi.
• It was added that the victim and her sister succumbed, while the husband survived with injuries. 
• It was also mentioned before the Bombay High Court that at the time of her death, the victim was aged 40 years, while her husband was 45 years, and the children were aged 16 and 15 years, respectively. 
• On December 23, 1994, the husband and children filed a claim before the tribunal, which directed the insurance company to pay them Rs 5.52 crore. 

Forged documents

Representing the insurance company, advocate Devendranath S Joshi submitted before the Bombay High Court that in the claim petition filed before the tribunal, it was stated that the victim was employed with M/s Royal Trader, Dubai, and had an annual income of 1 million dirhams. 

He added that the victim’s husband claimed in his evidence that his wife assisted him in his construction business, whereas one Abdulla, the erstwhile employer of Sawlani, stated that the victim was associated with him as part of a team for interior designing. 

It was further submitted that there were three different versions on record regarding the vocation of the victim. He added that documents produced on record by the husband are seriously questionable and appear to have been fabricated to inflate the income of the victim. 

He urged that the family of the victim was entitled to a consortium of Rs 40,000 each, aggregating to Rs 1.2 lakh, along with funeral expenses of Rs 15,000 and loss of estate of Rs 15,000. 

Company can’t escape liability

Representing the family of the victim, advocate Hegde argued before the Bombay High Court that the various documents, such as income proof and bank statements, were produced and specifically marked by the tribunal, which supported the evidence of the erstwhile employer of the victim.

Hedge added that since both vehicles were insured with the insurance company, they cannot escape liability for paying compensation in the present case.  

It was further submitted that the tribunal had grossly erred in failing to award any future prospects while otherwise allowing the claim of the family. 

It was therefore submitted that re-determination of the compensation should be done, and the same was requested of the Bombay High Court.