Delhi High Court
Vishakha Devi And Ors. vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 19 April, 2001
Equivalent citations: I (2001) ACC 316, II (2001) ACC 504, 2002 ACJ 2076, 92 (2001) DLT 389
Bench: A D Singh, O Dwivedi
ORDER
1. This is a letters patent appeal directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 19th September, 2000.
2. Mr. Ram Avtar Gupta, a Sales Supervisor working in a private firm, met with an accident on 21st February, 1988. He died on the spot as a result of the accident. He was survived by the appellants, viz., wife and four children. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, the 'Tribunal') awarded compensation of Rs. 2,02,000/- Along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum to the wife and children of the deceased who are the appellants before us. Not satisfied with the award, the matter was carried in appeal by the appellants. The learned Subgke Judge while enhancing the compensation to Rs. 2,61,000/- did not disturb the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal.
3. It is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the income of the deceased at the time of the accident was Rs. 1,450/- per months. The Tribunal for the purposes of computing the compensation assessed the gross monthly salary of the deceased as Rs. 2,100/-. This was done keeping in view the likelihood of the salary of the deceased being enhanced in course of time in case he had lived. The Tribunal calculated the monthly dependency of heirs of the deceased as Rs. 1,400/-. The Tribunal failed to adequately consider the question that had the deceased lived he would have earned a much higher emoluments than a party sum of Rs. 2,100/- per month because of normal rise in salary which an employee receives during the course of his employment and the fact that the salaries and wages all over have gone up considerably. Therefore, the Tribunal was not right in taking gross monthly salary of the deceased as Rs. 2,100/- per month for computing the compensation payable to his heirs. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that for purposes of calculating compensation the salary of the deceased ought to have been assessed as Rs. 3,000/- per month. We may point out that the case of the legal heirs of the deceased before the Tribunal was that the deceased was not only getting salary from his employer but he was also being paid commission and other allowances. However learned Counsel for the appellants state that he will be satisfied if the dependency of the deceased is taken as Rs. 2,000/- per month. Keeping in view the decision of the A.C. Gupta and Anr. v. New India Assurance Co. ltd. and Ors., LPA No. 56/90, decided on September 1, 2000, we assess the dependency of the appellants at Rs. 2,000/- per month. We are also of the opinion that the multipler of 12 applied by the Tribunal which was raised to 15 by the learned Single Judge was quite low. Considering the fact that at the time of the fatal accident the deceased was only forty-two years of age and his children being quite young would have remained dependent upon him for a long time, we are of the view that a multiplier of 18 should have been applied for the proposes of determining the compensation payable to the appellants. In arriving at the said multiplier we have also considered that the age of retirement has been enhanced from 58 years to 60 years in case of Government servants. in private employment a person goes on working even after the age of 60 years. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge ought to have applied a multiplier of 18. We order accordingly. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the orders of the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge are modified to the extent indicated above. The appellants will be entitle to interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of the filing of the petition before the Tribunal till the date of payment.
The appeal stands disposed of.
4. Appeal disposed of.
