Delhi High Court
Manwari vs Harsh Vardhan & Ors. on 19 March, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
32
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP. 330/2004
Date of Decision: 19th March, 2009
%
MANWARI ..... Appellant
Through : Ms. Aruna Mehta, Adv.
versus
HARSH VARDHAN & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Kanwal Choudhary,
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 appellant has challenged the award of the learned
Tribunal whereby the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- has
been awarded to the appellant. The appellant seeks the
enhancement of the award amount.
2. On 27th September, 1989, at about 5:30pm, a child
named Manju, along with some other children, was walking
on the kacha side of the road near House No.85, Pocket E-16,
Sector-8, Rohini when a Fiat car bearing No.DIA-7191 driven
rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 came on the
kacha side of the road and hit an electricity box which was
broken and thereafter the car hit Manju who sustained fatal
injuries and died on the spot.
3. The deceased was aged six years at the time of the
accident. She was survived by her parents who filed the
claim petition before the learned Tribunal. The father of the
deceased expired during the pendency of the petition before
the learned Tribunal whereupon her brother was impleaded
who has also since expired. The mother of the deceased is
the sole surviving claimant and is appellant in this appeal.
4. The learned Tribunal has awarded lump-sum amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation on account of the death of
the deceased in the accident.
5. In the case of Manju Devi Vs. Musafir Paswan, VII
(2005) SLT 257, the Hon'ble Supreme Court awarded
compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- in respect of death of a 13-
years old boy by applying the multiplier of 15 and taking the
notional income of Rs.15,000/- as per the Second Schedule of
the Motor Vehicles Act. The relevant portion of the said
judgment is reproduced hereunder:-
"As set out in the Second Schedule to the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for a boy of 13
years of age, a multiplier of 15 would have
to be applied. As per the Second
Schedule, he being a non-earning person,
a sum of Rs.15,000/- must be taken as the
income. Thus, the compensation comes to
Rs.2,25,000/-"
6. In the case of Syam Narayan Vs. Kitty Tours &
Travels, 2006 ACJ 320 relating to the death of a child aged
5 years, this Court relying on the judgment of the Apex Court
in Manju Devi's case (supra) awarded compensation to
the parents by applying the notional income of Rs.15,000/-
and multiplier of 15 as per the Second Schedule and further
awarded Rs.50,000/- for loss of company of the child as also
pain and suffering by them. The relevant portion of the said
judgment is reproduced hereunder:-
"3. By and under the award dated
5.12.2003, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- has
been awarded to the appellants. While
awarding sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to
appellants, learned M.A.C.T. has held that
the income of the deceased child was
incapable of assessment or estimation.
Recognising that every parent has a
reasonable expectation of financial and
moral support from his child, in the
absence of any evidence led, learned
M.A.C.T. opined that the interest of justice
requires that appellants are compensated
with the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.
4. Had the Tribunal peeped into the
Second Schedule, as per section 163-A of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it would have
dawned on the Tribunal that vide serial
No.6, notional income for compensation in
case of fatal accidents has been stipulated
at Rs.15,000/- per annum.
5. In the decision reported as Manju
Devi V. Musafir Paswan, 2005 ACJ 99 (SC),
dealing with the accidental death of 13
years old boy, while awarding
compensation under the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, Apex Court took into account
the notional income stipulated in the
Second Schedule being Rs.15,000/- per
annum.
6. In the instant case, baby Chanda was
aged 5 years. Age of the appellants as on
date of accident was 28 years and 26
years respectively as recorded in the
impugned award. Applying a multiplier of
15 as set out in Second Schedule which
refers to the said multiplier, where age of
the victim is upto 15 years, compensation
determinable comes to Rs.15,000 x 15 =
Rs.2,25,000/-.
7. The learned Tribunal has awarded
Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of expectation
of financial and moral support as also loss
of company of the child, mental agony,
etc. I have found that the parents are
entitled to compensation in the sum of
Rs.2,25,000/- on account of loss of
financial support from the deceased child.
I award a sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of
loss of company of the child as also pain
and suffering suffered by them as a result
of the untimely death of baby Chanda.
Appeal accordingly stands disposed of
enhancing the compensation to
Rs.2,75,000/-.
7. The case of Sobhagya Devi vs. Sukhvir Singh, II
(2006) ACC 1997 related to the death of a 12-year old boy
in which following the decision of the Apex Court in Manju
Devi's case (supra), the Rajasthan High Court also
awarded Rs.2,25,000/- by applying the Second Schedule of
the Motor Vehicles Act.
8. In the case of R.K. Malik vs. Kiran Pal, III (2006)
ACC 261, 22 children died in an accident of a school bus
which fell in river Yamuna. This Court held the Second
Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act to be the appropriate
method for computing the compensation. With respect to
the non-pecuniary damages, the Court observed that loss of
dependency of life and pain and suffering on that account,
generally speaking is same and uniform to all regardless of
status unless there is a specific case made out for deviation.
This Court awarded Rs.75,000/- towards non-pecuniary
compensation.
9. This case is squarely covered by the aforesaid
judgments of the Apex court followed by this Court. The
compensation to the appellant is, therefore, enhanced from
Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.3,00,000/- (Rs.2,25,000/- as per the
Second Schedule taking the notional income of the deceased
to be Rs.15,000/- and applying the multiplier of 15 and
Rs.75,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages for loss of love
and affection, loss of company of the child and also pain and
suffering as a result of the untimely death of her daughter).
10. With respect to the interest, the learned Tribunal has
awarded interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of
the petition till realization. The rate of interest from the date
of filing of the petition till realization on the award of
Rs.1,00,000/- is not being disturbed. However, on the
enhanced amount, the rate of interest shall be 7.5% from the
date of filing of the petition till realization in terms of the
judgment of the Apex Court in the Case of Dharampal vs.
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, III 2008 ACC
(1) SC.
11. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The compensation
to the appellant is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to
Rs.3,00,000/- along with interest @9% per annum on
Rs.1,00,000/- from the date of filing of the petition till
realization and @7.5% per annum on the remaining amount
of Rs.2,00,000/- from the date of filing of the petition till
realization.
12. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced
award amount along with interest with the learned Tribunal
within 30 days. 70% of the award amount shall remain in a
fixed deposit with a nationalized bank or post office for a
period of 10 years on which she shall be entitled to periodical
interest and the remaining 30% of the award amount along
with proportionate interest be released to her.
13. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to counsel for both
the parities under signatures of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J
MARCH 19, 2009
aj
