Delhi High Court
The New India Assuranc Co Ltd vs Rambha Devi And Ors on 20 April, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
14
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP. 614/2008
Date of Decision: 20th April, 2009
%
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANC CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.
versus
RAMBHA DEVI AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through : None.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned
Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.7,20,000/- has been
awarded to respondents No.1 to 6.
2. The accident dated 20th - 21st January, 2005 resulted in
the death of Ram Dev Singh. Ram Dev Singh was survived
by his widow, mother and children who filed the claim
petition before the learned Tribunal for compensation.
3. The deceased was aged 32 years at the time of the
accident and was working as Electrician with the tent house
earning Rs.6,000/- per month. However, in the absence of
documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal took the
minimum wages of Rs.3,044/- per month and after
considering the increase in minimum wages, the income for
the purpose of computation was taken as Rs.5,000/- per
month. The learned Tribunal deducted 1/3rd towards
personal expenses of the deceased and applied the multiplier
of 17 to compute the compensation of Rs.6,80,000/-.
Rs.5,000/- was awarded towards funeral expenses,
transportation of dead body and loss of estate, Rs.10,000/-
towards loss of consortium to and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of
love and affection. The total compensation awarded was
Rs.7,20,000/-.
4. The appellant has challenged the impugned award on
various grounds inter alia that increase in minimum wages
should not have been considered; secondly, even if
considered, the increase would be Rs.4,566/- [(Rs.3,044 +
Rs.3,044 x 2)/2]; and lastly, lower multiplier should have
been applied.
5. With respect to the income of the deceased, the
increase in minimum wages should be taken by taking the
average of Rs.3,044/- and its double which comes to Rs.
4,566/-. As such, the learned Tribunal was in error in taking
Rs.5,000/-. The excess amount was to the tune of Rs.434/-.
The learned Tribunal also erred in deducting 1/3rd towards
personal expenses of the deceased considering that the
deceased left behind five legal representatives/dependents.
Deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses is not the
thumb rule and in the present case, the deduction should
have been 1/4th instead of 1/3rd. The learned Tribunal has
also awarded lower amount towards loss of consortium and
towards loss of love and affection. In Mohinder Kaur vs.
Hira Nand Sindhi, 2007 ACJ 2123, the Apex Court has
awarded interest @9% per annum on the compensation of
Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium relating to the
accident of 1982. The Madras High Court in the case of
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sulochana, III
(2007) ACC 50 (DB), has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards loss
of consortium and Rs.25,000/- to each of the claimants
towards loss of love and affection. This Court has also
awarded Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium in the case
of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Amresh Kumar,
2005 ACJ 538.
6. Considering the aforesaid judgments, the compensation
towards the loss of consortium and also towards loss of love
and affection is on a lower side.
7. The award of the learned Tribunal does not warrant
reduction considering the effect of excess of Rs.434/- per
month in computing that personal expenses of the deceased
have been deducted @ 1/3rd instead of 1/4th and the lower
amount awarded towards loss of consortium and loss of love
and affection.
8. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.
9. The Registry is directed to refund the statutory amount
of Rs.25,000/- to the appellant within two weeks.
CM No.17721/2008
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of
66 days in filing of this appeal is condoned.
2. CM stands disposed of.
CM No.17720/2008
Dismissed.
J.R. MIDHA, J
APRIL 20, 2009
aj
