Delhi High Court

Ram Pyari Anand & Ors vs National Insurance Co Ltd & Ors on 8 December, 2009

Author: J.R. Midha

35
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +   MAC.APP.No.273/2006

                               Date of Decision: 8th December, 2009
%

      RAM PYARI ANAND & ORS             ..... Appellants
                    Through : Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta and
                              Mr. Vineet Hans, Advs.

                      versus

      NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD & ORS ..... Respondents
                    Through : None.


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)

CM Nos.7765-67/2008

1. The delay in filing of the application for substitution of

the legal representatives of Ram Pyari Anand is condoned.

2. Appellant No.1, Ram Pyari Anand expired on 8th August,

2006 and her share has devolved upon appellants No.2 to 5

who are already on record and are substituted in place of

deceased-appellant No.1.

3. CMs stand disposed of.

MAC.APP. 273/2006

1. The appellants have challenged the award of the

learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.2,33,600/- has

been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek

enhancement of the award amount.

2. The accident dated 28th January, 2005 resulted in the

death of Madan Mohan Anand. The deceased was survived

by his widow, two sons, one daughter and mother who filed

the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.

3. The deceased was aged 59 years at the time of the

accident and was carrying on the business of supply of

sanitary fittings. The deceased was having his own shop at

Hauz Quazi, Peepal Mahadev in the name of M/s Sandeep

Sanitation and he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. The

widow of the deceased appeared in the witness box and

proved the income of the deceased by Income Tax Return -

Ex.PW1/21. PW-1 also proved the certificate of Chartered

Accountant regarding computation of compensation of

income as Ex.PW-1/27 and Ex.PW1/28.

4. The learned Tribunal took the income of the deceased

to be Rs.3,492.90 per month according to the minimum

wages for matriculate, deducted 1/3rd towards personal

expenses and applied the multiplier of 8 to compute the loss

of dependency at Rs.2,23,576/-. Rs.10,000/- has been

awarded towards loss of consortium and funeral expenses.

The total compensation awarded is Rs.2,33,600/-.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants has urged the

following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-

(i) The income of the deceased be taken to be

Rs.10,000/- per month as proved by Ex.PW1/21,

Ex.PW1/27 and Ex.PW1/28.

(ii) The future prospects be awarded to the

appellants.

(iii) The personal expenses of the deceased be

reduced from 1/3rd to 1/4th.

(iv) The multiplier be enhanced from 8 to 9.

(v) The compensation for loss of consortium be

enhanced.

(vi) The compensation be awarded for loss of love and

affection and loss of estate.

(vii) The rate of interest be enhanced.

6. With respect to the income of the deceased, the

learned Tribunal has erred in not considering Ex.PW1/21

which is the Income Tax Return filed by the deceased for the

year 2003-04. The learned Tribunal only considered

Ex.PW1/27 and Ex.PW1/28. However, the learned Tribunal

did not find Ex.PW1/27 and Ex.PW1/28 as sufficient proof of

income on the ground that the said documents were signed

by the Chartered Accountant only and they have not been

proved by examining the Chartered Accountant. The learned

Tribunal appears to have ignored Ex.PW1/21 which is the

Income Tax Return filed by the deceased in which the income

from business during the year 2002-03 has been declared to

be Rs.1,20,000/-.

7. The finding of the learned Tribunal with respect to the

income of the deceased is, therefore, set aside and the

income of the deceased as proved by Ex.PW1/21 is taken to

be Rs.1,20,000/- per annum.

8. The appellants also claimed future prospects. Since the

deceased was 59 years old and was self-employed, the claim

for future prospects is rejected following the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs.

Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129.

9. The deceased was aged 59 years at the time of the

accident and left behind five legal representatives.

According to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the case of Sarla Verma (supra), the appropriate multiplier

at the age of 59 years is 9 and the appropriate deduction is

1/4th as the deceased has left behind 4 to 6 legal

representatives.

10. Following the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, the multiplier is enhanced from 8 to 9 and

the personal expenses of the deceased are reduced from

1/3rd to 1/4th.

11. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards

loss of consortium and funeral expenses which is treated to

be only towards funeral expenses. Rs.10,000/- is awarded

for loss of consortium.

12. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any

compensation for loss of love and affection and loss of

estate. Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of love and

affection and Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate.

13. The learned Tribunal has awarded interest @7% per

annum. Following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Dharampal vs. U.P. State Road

Transport Corporation, III 2008 ACC (1) SC, the rate of

interest is enhanced from 7% per annum to 7.5% per annum.

14. Taking the income of the deceased to be Rs.1,20,000/-

per annum, deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses,

applying the multiplier of 9, adding Rs.10,000/- towards loss

of consortium, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection

and Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate and

Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses, the total

compensation is computed to be Rs.8,50,000/- [Rs.1,20,000

x 3/4 x 9) + Rs.10,000 + Rs.10,000 + Rs.10,000 +

Rs.10,000].

15. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is

enhanced from Rs.2,33,600/- to Rs.8,50,000/- along with

interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the

petition till realization.

16. The enhanced award amount along with interest be

deposited by respondent No.1 with UCO Bank A/c Parvesh

Anand by means of a cheque through Mr. M.M. Tandon,

Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street,

New Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) within 30 days.

17. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, the UCO Bank

is directed to release a sum of Rs.50,000/- to each of

appellants No.2 to 5 by transferring the said amount to their

Saving Bank Account.

18. The remaining amount be kept in fixed deposit for a

period of three years. The shares of appellant No.2 to 5 in

the balance amount shall be as under:-

      (i)     Appellant   No.2   :    40%
      (ii)    Appellant   No.3   :    20%
      (iii)   Appellant   No.4   :    20%
      (iv)    Appellant   No.5   :    20%

19. The interest on the aforesaid fixed deposits shall be

paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the respective

Savings Account of appellants No.2 to 5.

20. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be

permitted to appellants No.2 to 5 after due verification and

the Bank shall issue photo Identity Card to appellants No.2

to 5 to facilitate identity.

21. No cheque book be issued to appellants No.2 to 5

without the permission of this Court.

22. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be retained by

the Bank in the safe custody. However, the original Pass

Book shall be given to appellants No.2 to 5 along with the