39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.No.13/2009
% Date of decision: 26th November, 2009
SMT. NEETA JHA & ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Arjayveer Singh Jain and
Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advs.
versus
SURAJ BHAN & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, 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.1,33,000/- has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.
2. The accident dated 8th January, 1990 resulted in death of Pradeep Kumar Jha. The deceased was survived by his widow and son who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.
3. The deceased was 28 years at the time of the accident and was employed with M/s. Magnavision Electronics Ltd. at a monthly salary of Rs.1,500/-. Appellant No.1 appeared in the witness box and deposed that the deceased was working with MAC.APP.No.13/2009 Page 1 of 4 M/s. Magnavision Electronics Ltd., A-12, Commercial Complex, Defence Colony, New Delhi - 110024 at a salary of Rs.1,500/- p.m. The appellants also proved the original certificate issued by M/s. Magnavision Electronics Ltd. certifying that the deceased was working with them at a basic salary of Rs.1,500/- was being paid to him. The original certificate of M/s.Magnavision Electronics Ltd. was exhibited as Ex.PW1/1.
4. The learned Tribunal disbelieved the statement of PW1 as well as Ex.PW1/1 on the ground that the witness from M/s. Magnavision Electronics Ltd. has not been summoned to prove the same. The finding of the learned Tribunal in this regard is misconceived and is set aside. It has time and again been emphasized by this Court that proceedings before the learned Tribunal are not in the nature of civil trial. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that the Tribunal shall conduct an inquiry. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act further provides that the inquiry shall be summary in nature and the Tribunal shall formulate such procedure as it thinks fit. The duty has been cast on the learned Tribunal to conduct an inquiry to find out all the relevant facts including income of the deceased to award compensation in accordance with law.
5. The income of the deceased has been sufficiently proved by the statement of PW1 and Ex.PW1/1. However, if the learned Tribunal had any doubt on the veracity of the statement or the genuineness of the document, the leaned Tribunal could have conducted further inquiry into the matter. However, the learned MAC.APP.No.13/2009 Page 2 of 4 Tribunal failed to discharge the duty cast by law.
6. Be that as it may, this Court finds the evidence of PW1 and Ex.PW1/1 sufficient to prove the income of the deceased to be Rs.1,500/- per month. The deceased was aged 28 years at the time of the accident and 50% is added towards future prospects following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129 and the income of the deceased for computation of compensation is taken to be Rs.2,250/- (Rs.1,500 + 50%). 1/3 is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and the loss of dependency is taken to be Rs.1,500/- per month. Applying the multiplier of 18, the loss of dependency is computed to be Rs.3,24,000/-. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium and loss of estate and loss of love and affection which is fair and reasonable. However, no compensation is awarded for loss of estate. Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate. The appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs.3,59,000/- (Rs.3,24,000 + Rs.5,000 + Rs.20,000/- + Rs.10,000/-).
7. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced from Rs.1,33,000/- to Rs.3,59,000/-. The learned Tribunal has awarded interest @ 9% per annum which is not disturbed on the original award amount of Rs.1,33,000/-. However, on the enhanced award amount, the rate of interest shall be @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
8. The enhanced award amount along with interest be deposited MAC.APP.No.13/2009 Page 3 of 4 by respondent No.3 with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch A/c Neeta Jha by means of a cheque to be handed over to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) within 20 days.
9. The order with respect to the disbursement of the award amount shall be passed after examining the appellants who are directed to remain present in Court on the next date of hearing.
10. List the appeal on 22nd December, 2009.
11. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for both the parties under signature of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J NOVEMBER 26, 2009 s.pal MAC.APP.No.13/2009 Page 4 of 4