# Supreme Court Rejects Motor Accident Multiplier for Electrocution Claims 2026-08-22T21:41:25+00:00 | Governance | Indian Opinion Desk Corroboration: 1 independent outlet The Supreme Court has ruled that the multiplier method used to calculate compensation in motor accident cases cannot be applied to deaths caused by electrocution. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh set aside a Karnataka High Court decision that had used the method under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The case involved a man who died after contacting an 11 KV transmission line and another person who suffered severe injuries after touching a 66 KV line while retrieving a cricket ball. The Court said the Electricity Act, 2003 imposes liability on licensees in specified circumstances but does not prescribe a compensation formula. Referring to its 2014 decision in Raman v Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd, it held that compensation in such cases cannot be calculated using the motor accident framework. ## Indian Opinion Analysis The ruling limits the automatic transfer of compensation formulas from one statutory regime to another. In future electrocution claims, courts will have to assess the applicable legal duty, evidence on how the incident occurred and the claimant’s actual loss rather than rely on a fixed calculation borrowed from motor accident law. The outcome may also depend on whether disputed facts can be decided in writ proceedings or require a fuller evidentiary process. The next signal will be how lower courts quantify compensation after the High Court’s method has been rejected. ## Coverage - livelaw.in Reports the ruling, facts and legal reasoning without discernible slant This story was synthesised by AI from the source linked above. Tags: Electricity Act, Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation, Supreme Court of India Canonical: https://indianopinion.org/supreme-court-rejects-motor-accident-multiplier-for-electrocution-claims/ License: Summary and commentary (c) Indian Opinion, reusable with attribution. Facts belong to the linked sources. Cite: https://indianopinion.org/supreme-court-rejects-motor-accident-multiplier-for-electrocution-claims/#story-in-brief Review state: restored archive article, accurate at time of publication, not offered to search indexes. How this brief was made: an AI model read the report linked above and wrote this summary and analysis, which were published automatically. Published briefs are sampled every hour by an automated quality check; the editor verifies its findings and approves corrections, and corrected briefs carry a dated correction line. We do no original reporting. Methodology: https://indianopinion.org/ai-use-policy/