Delhi High Court
Pintesh & Ors. vs Lakshmi Chand & Ors. on 27 August, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
43
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.No.26/2008
% Date of decision: 27th August, 2009
PINTESH & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through : Mr. L.S. Saini, Adv.
versus
LAKSHMI CHAND & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Ram Ashray, Adv. for R - 3
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.4,25,896/- has been
awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of
the award amount.
2. The accident dated 29th March, 2003 resulted in the death
of Ravinder Kumar. The deceased was survived by his widow and
two minor children who filed the claim petition before the learned
Tribunal.
3. The deceased was aged 28 years at the time of the
accident. The deceased was working as Head Mistri with M/s
Om Namah Shivaya Enterprises and was alleged to be earning
Rs.4,600/- per month as per the certificate Ex.PW1/1. However,
the learned Tribunal disregarded the said evidence on the ground
that PW-2 did not produce any licence to manufacture any LPG
stove and spare parts and also that the appointment letter of the
deceased was not produced. It was also contended by the
appellant that the deceased was running a Kiryana shop and was
alleged to be earning Rs.3,600/- per month. The deceased was
maintaining account book of the Kiryana shop in his hand writing
which was produced by PW-1. The appellant also produced PW-4
who regularly purchased the articles from the shop of the
deceased. However, the learned Tribunal disregarded this
evidence also on the ground that neither registration certificate
under Delhi Shops and Establishment Act was produced nor
Income Tax return, account books or sales tax registration
number were produced. The learned Tribunal took the minimum
wages of Rs.2,784/- in respect of unskilled worker to compute the
compensation. 1/3rd was deducted towards the personal
expenses of the deceased and the multiplier of 18 was applied to
compute the loss of dependency at Rs.4,00,896/-. Rs.5,000/- has
been awarded for funeral expenses and Rs.20,000/- has been
awarded for loss of consortium. The total compensation awarded
is Rs.4,25,896/-.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged the
following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-
(i) The income of the deceased be taken to be Rs.4,600/-
per month as per the Ex.PW1/1 + Rs.3,600/- per
month towards the income from the business. In the
alternative, it is submitted that the minimum wages
for the skilled worker be taken as the deceased was
the skilled worker working as Head Mistri for
manufacture of LPG stove and spare parts.
(ii) The compensation for loss of love and affection and
loss of estate be awarded.
5. The appellant has successfully proved that the deceased
was Head Mistri engaged in manufacturing LPG stove and spare
parts. However, the salary was not proved by sufficient evidence.
In this view of the matter, the case for taking minimum wages for
skilled worker is made out. As per the schedule of minimum
wages, the minimum wages of a skilled worker as on the date of
the accident were Rs.3,207.90. It is well settled in the cases of
Kanwar Devi vs. Bansal Roadways, 2008 ACJ 2182, Lekh
Raj vs Suram Singh, 2007 ACJ 2165, National Insurance
Company Limited vs. Renu Devi III (2008) ACC 134 and
UPSRC vs. Munni Devi, MAC.APP.No.310/2007 decided on
28.07.2008 that the Court should take judicial notice of increase
in minimum wages to meet the inflation and rise in price index.
This Court has taken the view that the minimum wages get
doubled over the period of 10 years and increase in minimum
wages is not akin to future prospects. Taking the average of
Rs.3,207.90 and its double, the income of the deceased for
computation of compensation is taken to be Rs.4,811.85. 1/3 rd is
deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased and the
loss of dependency of the appellants is computed to be
Rs.3,207.90 per month.
6. The learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 18. However,
the appropriate multiplier 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 is 17.
Applying the multiplier of 17, the loss of dependency of the
appellant is computed to be Rs.6,54,411.60 (Rs.3,207.90 x
12 x 17).
7. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for
loss of love and affection and loss of estate. Rs.10,000/- is
awarded for loss of love and affection and Rs.10,000/- is awarded
for loss of estate. The total compensation is computed to be
Rs.6,99,411.60 (Rs.6,54,411.60 + Rs.5,000 + Rs.20,000 +
Rs.10,000 + Rs.10,000) which is rounded of as Rs.6,99,412/-.
8. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced
from Rs.4,25,896 to Rs.6,99,412/- along with interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
9. The enhanced award amount be deposited by respondent
No.3 with the UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch within 30 days.
10. The cheque be drawn in the name of UCO Bank A/c Pintesh
and be handed over to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team,
UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi, Mobile No.
09310356400.
11. 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.
12. List for directions on 14th October, 2009
13. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for
both the parties under the signature of Court Master.
14. Copy of this order be given sent to the Mr. M.M. Tandon,
Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New
Delhi, Mobile No. 09310356400.
J.R. MIDHA, J
AUGUST 27, 2009
mk
