IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
FAO No. 85/1999
Judgment reserved on: 2.4.2008
Judgment delivered on: 20.4.2009
Smt. Ram Kali & Ors. ..... Appellants.
Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Adv.
versus
Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. ..... Respondents
Through: Nemo.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR,
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may No
be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest? No
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the award dated 27.10.1998 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,32,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum to the claimants.
FAO No. 85/1999 Page 1 of 7
2. The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows:
3. On 28.3.1990 at about 4.15 PM deceased Om Prakash hired a Tempo bearing registration No: DDL 5341 at Tilak Nagar for carriage of four bags of flour from Tilak Nagar to Najafgarh. Om Prakash was travelling in the Tempo along with the goods. The said tempo was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent No. 1. When the tempo reached a place near Mohan Garden on the Najafgarh Road, the tempo went off the road and struck against a Neem Tree. As a result of the impact, Om Prakash received grievous injuires to which he succumbed later on.
4. A claim petition was filed on 18.5.1990 and an award was made on 27.10.1998. Aggrieved with the said award enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal.
5. Ms. Saroj Bidawat, counsel for the appellants contended that the tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 1933/- per month whereas after looking at the facts and circumstances of the case the tribunal should have assessed the FAO No. 85/1999 Page 2 of 7 income of the deceased at Rs. 3866/- per month. The counsel further maintained that the tribunal erred in making the deduction to the tune of 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses when the deceased was supporting a large family at the time of accident and is survived by his wife, three minor children and aged mother. The counsel submitted that the tribunal has erroneously applied the multiplier of 10 while computing compensation when according to the facts and circumstances of the case multiplier of 15 should have been applied. It was urged by the counsel that the tribunal erred in not considering future prospects while computing compensation as it failed to appreciate that the deceased would have earned much more in near future as he was of 44 yrs of age only and would have lived for another 20-30 yrs had he not met with the accident. It was also alleged by the counsel that the tribunal did not consider the fact that due to high rates of inflation the deceased would have earned much more in near future and the tribunal also failed in appreciating the fact that even the minimum wages are revised twice in an year and hence, the deceased would have earned much more in his life span. The counsel contended that the tribunal erred in not awarding FAO No. 85/1999 Page 3 of 7 compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral expenses, loss of estate, loss of consortium, mental pain and sufferings and the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the appellants.
6. Nobody has been appearing for the respondents.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.
8. As regards the income of the deceased, PW1 Shri S.N. Uppal, UDC deposed that the deceased was working as a pump operator with the office of Executive Engineer, Ramjas Tank, Bapa Naghar and was drawing a salry of Rs. 1933/- p.m.
9. After considering all these factors I am of the view that the tribunal has not erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 1933/- p.m. as duly proved on record by PW1.
10. Therefore, no interference is made in relation to income of the deceased by this court.
FAO No. 85/1999 Page 4 of 7
11. As regards the future prospects I am of the view that the Tribunal has already considered future prospects of the deceased and assed the income at Rs. 2900/-. Therefore, no interference is made in the award in the facts and circumstances of the case.
12. As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant that the 1/3RD deduction made by the tribunal are on the higher side as the deceased is survived by wife, three children and mother. Considering the facts of the present case, I am inclined to interfere with the award on this ground and modify the award by deducting 1/4th expenses towards personal expenses of the deceased.
13. As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant that the tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 10 in the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the tribunal has committed no error. This case pertains to the year 1990 and at that time II schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act was not brought on the statute books. The said schedule came on the statute book in the year 1994 and prior to 1994 the law of the land was as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in 1994 SCC (Cri) 335, FAO No. 85/1999 Page 5 of 7 G.M., Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas. In the said judgment it was observed by the Court that maximum multiplier of 16 could be applied by the Courts, which after coming in to force of the II schedule has risen to 18. The deceased was of 44 years at the time of the accident and is survivied by his widow, 3 children and an aged mother. In the facts of the present case I am of the view that after looking at the age of the claimants and the deceased the multiplier of 10 has been rightly applied by the Tribunal.
14. On the contention regarding that the tribunal erred in not granting compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral expenses, loss of estate and the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the appellants. In this regard compensation towards loss of love and affection is awarded at Rs. 40,000/-; compensation towards funeral expenses is awarded at Rs. 10,000/- and compensation towards loss of estate is awarded at Rs. 10,000/-. Further, Rs. 50,000-/ is awarded towards loss of consortium.
15. As far as the contention pertaining to the awarding of amount towards mental pain and sufferings caused to the appellants due to the sudden demise of the deceased and the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to FAO No. 85/1999 Page 6 of 7 the appellants is concerned, I do not feel inclined to award any amount as compensation towards the same as the same are not conventional heads of damages. Therefore, compensation towards loss of dependency comes to Rs. 2,61,000/- (2900 x ¾ x 12 x 10).
16. After considering Rs. 1,10,000/-, which is granted towards, the total compensation comes out as Rs. 3,71,000/-.
17. In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is enhanced to Rs. 3,71,000/- from Rs. 2,32,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realisation and the same should be paid to the appellants by the respondent in the same proportion as awarded by the Tribunal.
18. With the above direction, the present appeal is disposed of.
20.4.2009 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
FAO No. 85/1999 Page 7 of 7