Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dipak Misra, C.J.I., A.K. Sikri, A.M. Khanwilkar, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan

JUDGMENT

Dipak Misra, C.J.I.

1. Perceiving cleavage of opinion between Reshma Kumari and Ors. v. Madan Mohan and Anr. MANU/SC/0287/2013 : (2013) 9 SCC 65 and Rajesh and Ors. v. Rajbir Singh and Ors. MANU/SC/0480/2013 : (2013) 9 SCC 54, both three-Judge Bench decisions, a two-Judge Bench of this Court in National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pushpa and Ors. MANU/SC/1246/2014 : (2015) 9 SCC 166 thought it appropriate to refer the matter to a larger Bench for an authoritative pronouncement, and that is how the matters have been placed before us.

2. In the course of deliberation we will be required to travel backwards covering a span of two decades and three years and may be slightly more and thereafter focus on the axis of the controversy, that is, the decision in Sarla Verma and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. MANU/SC/0606/2009 : (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein the two-Judge Bench made a sanguine endeavour to simplify the determination of claims by specifying certain parameters.

3. Before we penetrate into the past, it is necessary to note what has been stated in Reshma Kumari (supra) and Rajesh's case. In Reshma Kumari the three-Judge Bench was answering the reference made in Reshma Kumari and Ors. v. Madan Mohan and Anr. MANU/SC/1303/2009 : (2009) 13 SCC 422. The reference judgment noted divergence of opinion with regard to the computation Under Sections 163-A and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity, "the Act") and the methodology for computation of future prospects. Dealing with determination of future prospects, the Court referred to the decisions in Sarla Dix........