Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co. vs Madhubala & Ors. on 31 March, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP. NO.61/2008
Date of reserve: 4th February, 2009
% Date of decision: 31st March, 2009
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.S.L. Gupta with
Mr. R.L. Kadamb, Advocates.
versus
MADHUBALA & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate
for respondents No.1 to 6.
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
1. The appellant has challenged the award dated 15th
October, 2007 passed by the learned Tribunal whereby the
compensation of Rs.10,69,200/- has been awarded to
respondents No.1 to 6.
2. On 18th March, 2003, the deceased Vijay was sitting on
the pillion of motor cycle No.DL-4S-Y-6343 near Rao Tula Ram
Marg when the driver lost control of the motor cycle and hit
against the pavement resulting in death of Vijay.
3. The deceased was aged 30 years at the time of the
accident and he was working as Safai-karamchari with
MAC .APP. No.61/2008
National Insurance Company Ltd. earning Rs.4,393.62 per
month.
4. The deceased by survived by his wife, two daughters,
one son and parents who filed the claim petition before the
learned Tribunal.
5. Respondent No.1, wife of the deceased, appeared in the
witness box before the learned Tribunal as PW-1 and proved
the age and income of the deceased. She deposed that the
deceased was aged 30 years at the time of the death and was
working with National Insurance Company Ltd. earning
Rs.4,393.62 per month. She further deposed that the
deceased left behind two daughters aged five and eight years,
one son aged four years and parents besides herself who were
dependant on the deceased. The wife also produced the
original salary slips Ex.PW-1/5 and Ex.PW-1/6.
6. PW-2, Om Prakash is the eye witness who proved that
the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of
motor cycle No.DL-4S-Y-6343 by respondent No.7.
7. PW-3, Administrative Officer of National Insurance
Company produced the service record of the deceased i.e.
salary slips - Ex.PW-3/1 and Ex.PW-3/2, appointment letter -
Ex.PW-3/3, confirmation letter - Ex.PW-3/4, appointment letter
Ex.PW-3/5 and joining report - Ex.PW-3/6.
MAC .APP. No.61/2008
8. The learned Tribunal took the salary of the deceased for
computation of compensation at Rs.4,243/- after deducting
the TPT and washing allowance of Rs.150/- from the last
drawn salary of Rs.4393.62 as per Ex.PW-1/6. The learned
Tribunal took the future prospects into consideration by taking
the average of the salary and double the salary i.e.
Rs.4243+8486=12729/2=6364/- per month. Since the
deceased left behind six legal heirs, the learned Tribunal
deducted 1/5 amount towards the personal expenses of the
deceased and the loss of dependency was taken at Rs.5094/-
per month. The learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 17
as per the Second Schedule to compute the total loss of
dependency at Rs.10,39,176/-. Rs.25,000/- was awarded for
loss of love and affection and consortium and Rs.5,000/-
towards funeral expenses and the total compensation
awarded was Rs.10,69,176/-.
9. The appellant has urged the following grounds to
challenge the impugned award:-
(i) The income of the deceased be taken to be
Rs.4,393.62 per month and the future prospects
should not be taken into consideration.
(ii) The personal expenses of the deceased be
deducted to the extent of 1/3 instead of 1/5.
(iii) The learned Tribunal could not have awarded more
MAC .APP. No.61/2008
had claimed Rs.10,00,000/- whereas the Tribunal
awarded Rs.10,69,200/-.
(iv) The driving licence of the driver was fake and
forged and, therefore, the Insurance Company is
not liable.
10. With respect to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal
has rightly taken the future prospects into consideration
following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla
Dixit's Vs. Balwant Yadav, 1996 SCC 1274. The deceased
was working in a public corporation and there are annual
increments in the salary besides revision of DA and
promotion. I agree with the reasons given by the Tribunal in
paras 20 to 23 for taking the future prospects into
consideration.
11. The deceased left behind six legal representatives i.e.
wife aged about 28 years, two minor daughters aged 8 and 6
years and one minor son aged 5 years and parents aged 55
and 60 years. The deduction of 1/3 income as personal
expenses is not a thumb rule. Where the number of
dependents is more, the lesser deduction has been permitted
by the Courts and where income is meager, the Courts have
even held that no deduction should be made towards personal
expenses. The learned Tribunal has referred to the
judgments in the cases of Kela Devi Vs. Ram Chand,
ACJ 1986 page 1818; Khajano Devi Vs. Moti Lal, ACJ
MAC .APP. No.61/2008
1994 (I) P-485; Phoola Rani Vs. Rattan Lal, ACJ 85 (I) P-
530; Misri Devi Vs. New India Assurance Co., ACJ 1998
(I) 665; Ved Prakash Vs. Gurmeet Singh, ACJ 1992 II P-
147; and New India Assurance company Ltd. Vs. Smt.
Nirmala Devi & Ors, Transport and Accident Cases 2007
(3) 414 in support of 1/5th deduction. I agree with the
findings of the learned Tribunal.
12. With respect to the third ground of challenge it has been
held in the case of Virender Singh Vs. Anand Prakash,
2007 Rajdhani Law Report 532 that the claimants are
entitled to just compensation which can be more than the
amount claimed.
13. With respect to the fake and forged driving licence, the
learned Tribunal has given the recovery rights to the appellant
against respondent No.8 in accordance with law.
14. There is no merit in the appeal which is dismissed. No
costs.
J.R. MIDHA, J
March 31, 2009
s.pal
MAC .APP. No.61/2008
