33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.No.293/2008
% Date of decision: 19th November, 2009
SHOBHA GULHAR ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. D.D. Singh, Adv.
versus
RAM PAL ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Adv.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES
3. Whether the judgment should be YES
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.8,26,000/- has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.
2. The accident dated 11th June, 2006 resulted in the death of Ramesh Gulhar. The deceased was survived by his widow, daughter, son and mother who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.
3. The deceased was aged 49 years at the time of the accident and was carrying on the business of herbal medicines. The income of the deceased at the time of the accident was MAC.APP.No.293/2008 Page 1 of 5 Rs.1,02,330/- as per the Income Tax Return - Ex.P6. However, the learned Tribunal took the average income for the last three years, added 50% towards the future prospects, deducted 1/3 rd towards personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 10 to compute the loss of dependency at Rs.7,56,000/-. Rs.10,000/- has been awarded towards funeral expenses, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of love and affection. The total compensation awarded is Rs.8,26,000/-.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants has urged the following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-
(i) The income of the deceased be taken to be Rs.1,02,330/- as per Income Tax Return - Ex.P6.
(ii) The personal expenses of the deceased be reduced from 1/3rd to 1/4th.
(iiI) The multiplier be enhanced from 10 to 13.
(iv) The compensation be awarded for loss of estate.
(v) The rate of interest be enhanced from 7% per annum to 7.5% per annum.
5. The income of the deceased as per Income Tax Return - Ex.P6 is Rs.1,02,330/- which should have been taken by the learned Tribunal as the income of the deceased. The learned Tribunal was in error in taking the average income of the last three years. The finding of the learned Tribunal in this regard is, therefore, set aside. The income of the deceased is taken to be Rs.1,02,330/- as per Ex.P6. The deceased paid the Income Tax of MAC.APP.No.293/2008 Page 2 of 5 Rs.9,466/- which is deducted from the income of the deceased and the income is taken to be Rs.92,864/- (Rs.1,02,330/- minus Rs.9,466/-).
6. The learned Tribunal has added 50% towards the future prospects of the deceased. The learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that according to the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129, the future prospects between the age group of 40 and 50 is 30% in respect of persons having permanent job and no future prospects are taken for self employed persons. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in exceptional cases, the future prospects can be taken into consideration in respect of self-employed persons. The deceased in the present case was carrying on the business of herbal medicines and the income in the last one year before his death had increased from Rs.60,350/- per annum to Rs.1,02,330/- per annum. The widow of the deceased has deposed on oath that the business of her husband was expanding. Considering the evidence on record, 30% of the income is added towards the future prospects and the income of the deceased for computation of compensation is taken to be Rs.1,20,723/- per annum (Rs.92,864 + 30%).
7. The learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. According to the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), MAC.APP.No.293/2008 Page 3 of 5 the appropriate deduction towards personal expenses where the deceased has left behind 4 to 6 dependants is 1/4 th. The personal expenses of the deceased is, therefore, reduced from 1/3 rd to 1/4th.
8. The learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 10. The appropriate multiplier at the age of 49 years according to the judgment of Sarla Verma (supra) is 13. The multiplier is, therefore, enhanced from 10 to 13.
9. Taking the income of the deceased at Rs.1,20,723/- per annum, deducting 1/4th towards the personal expenses and applying the multiplier of 13, the loss of dependency is computed to be Rs.11,77,050/- ( Rs.1,20,723 x 3/4 x 13).
10. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of estate. However, compensation awarded for loss of consortium is on a higher side and, therefore, compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of consortium is treated to be towards loss of consortium and loss of estate.
11. The learned Tribunal has awarded interest @7% per annum. However, the appropriate rate of interest according to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharampal & Ors. vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, III 2008 ACC (1) SC is 7.5% per annum. The rate of interest is, therefore, enhanced from 7% per annum to 7.5% per annum.
MAC.APP.No.293/2008 Page 4 of 5
12. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced from Rs.8,26,000/- to Rs.12,47,050/- (Rs.11,77,050 + Rs.10,000 + Rs.30,000 + Rs.30,000) along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
13. The enhanced award amount along with interest be deposited by respondent No.3 with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch A/c Shobha Gulhar through Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member- Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) within 30 days.
14. The order with respect to the disbursement of the said amount shall be passed after examining the appellants who are directed to remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing.
15. List on 22nd December, 2009.
16. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for the parties under signature of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J NOVEMBER 19, 2009 aj MAC.APP.No.293/2008 Page 5 of 5