* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 13.07.2011
+ MAC APPEAL NO. 205/2011 & CM No. 4817/2011
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ...........Appellant
Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva,
Advocate.
Versus
KAVITA & OTHERS ..........Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Yes
INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 The award impugned before this Court is the award dated 22.12.2010 whereby the compensation in the sum of `9,30,330/- had been awarded to the claimants.
2 On 04.05.2006, Mr. Satish Kumar suffered an accident pursuant to a head on collision of his two wheeler scooter with the offending vehicle; the deceased succumbed to his injuries. Oral and documentary evidence was led. The aforenoted amount was accordingly awarded in favour of the claimants. MAC APPEAL No. 205/2011 Page 1 of 3 3 There is a twofold argument urged before this Court. It is contended that the minimum wages of the deceased had been taken into account and in this regard the Tribunal had taken into consideration the price index and rise on inflation which is incorrect and opposed to the ratio of judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Sarla Verma Vs. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121. The second argument is that under the category of "love and affection" only a token amount could have been awarded; the Tribunal had erroneously awarded a sum of `1 lac.
4 It is not in dispute and as has been held by the catena of judgments reported in 2008 ACJ 2182 (Delhi) Kanwar Devi Vs. Bansal Roadways, 2007 ACJ 2165 (Delhi) Lekhraj Vs. Suram Singh and 2009 ACJ 1921 (Delhi) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Renu Devi judicial notice can be taken of the fact that price rise over period of time and cost of inflation has to be kept in mind even while considering the case of those claimants where the deceased was under the cover of minimum wages; this matter has rested with the aforenoted judgments and the Tribunal had rightly considered the price rise index and cost of inflation while computing and calculating the amount of compensation awarded to the claimants. 5 The amount of `1 lac awarded under the head of loss of love and affection also does not suffer from any infirmity and this is in MAC APPEAL No. 205/2011 Page 2 of 3 view of law laid in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bali Ram Bansal & Others in MAC APPEAL No. 257/2010 decided on 26.04.2010. In this case, ground of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head of love and affection had been upheld by a Bench of this Court. The Court had inter-alia noted as follows:-
"However, while granting compensation for loss of life, the courts have been granting token amount under different heads like loss of consortium, loss of estate and loss of love and affection apart from loss of dependency. Such amounts are granted by the Tribunals at their own discretion considering several aspects connected with the family and death of the person. No doubt each presiding officer of the Tribunal and each judge of the High Court and/or the Supreme Court shall have his own concepts and standards and would be considering amounts on such heads as per their own concepts. While considering an appeal, substituting discretionary relief granted by the Tribunal by another amount on its own estimations of loss of love and affection would not be proper. The Tribunal is a court where evidence of the dependents is recorded and has firsthand experience of the kind of love and affection the dependents felt deprived of. Thus, the Tribunal is the best judge of the amount of compensation to be awarded under such heads."
The claimants are the widow and minor children of the deceased; deceased was 31 years of age on the date of his death. There is no ground to interfere in the award of compensation for the deprivation of „love and affection‟.
Appeal is dismissed.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 13, 2011 a MAC APPEAL No. 205/2011 Page 3 of 3