Dtc vs Suraj Bhan & Anr
2010 Latest Caselaw 485 Del

41
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                       +       MAC.APP.No.196/2007

%                                 Date of decision: 29th January, 2010

      DTC                                 ..... Appellant
                           Through : Mr. Hanu Bhaskar, Adv.

                      versus

      SURAJ BHAN & ANR               ..... Respondents
                    Through : Mr. Mirza Aslam Beg, Adv. for
                              Ms. Sonia Sharma, Adv.
                              for R-2.

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 compensation of Rs.8,79,513/- has been

awarded to claimant/respondent No.1. The appellant seeks

reduction of the award amount.

2. Claimant/respondent No.1 has filed the cross-objections

seeking enhancement of the award amount.

3. The accident dated 4th April, 2003 resulted in amputation of

right leg of respondent No.1. The disability of the appellant was

assessed to be 90% as per disability certificate - Ex.PW1/7.

4. Claimant/respondent No.1 was 55 years at the time of the

accident and was working as a driver with DTC drawing a salary

of Rs.10,735/- per month. The learned Tribunal took the loss of

income of respondent No.1 to be five years salary and

Rs.6,44,100/- was awarded as salary for five years. Rs.50,413/-

has been awarded towards medical expenses, Rs.10,000/-

towards special diet and conveyance and Rs.1,00,000/- towards

non-pecuniary compensation. The total compensation awarded is

Rs.8,79,513/-.

5. The only ground urged by learned counsel for the appellant

at the time of hearing of this appeal is that respondent No.1 was

aged 55 years at the time of the accident and was due to retire

after one and a half months and, therefore, the loss of income

should have been awarded only for a period of one and a half

months instead of five years. The counsel respondent No.1, in

reply, submits that the loss of income awarded by the learned

Tribunal needs enhancement on the ground that the loss of

income has to be calculated according to the multiplier method

laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla

Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale

129.

6. Claimant/respondent No.1 was aged 55 years at the time of

the accident and the appropriate multiplier at the age of 55 years

is 11. Taking the salary of claimant/respondent No.1 to be

Rs.10,735/- and applying the multiplier of 11, the loss of income

is computed to be Rs.14,17,020/- (Rs.10,735 x 12 x 11). As per

the disability certificate - Ex.PW1/7, the disability of respondent

No.1 has been assessed to be 90%. However, the loss of earning

capacity is taken to be 50% and, therefore, respondent No.1 is

entitled to loss of income of Rs.7,08,510/- (Rs.14,17,020 x 50%).

7. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the

non-pecuniary compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal be

enhanced. The learned counsel refers to and relies upon the

judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Oriental

Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Vijay Kumar Mittal (2008) ACJ 1300,

where this Court examined all the previous judgments with

respect to the non-pecuniary compensation awarded in the cases

of permanent disability and held that the Courts have been

awarding about Rs.3,00,000/- under the heads of non-pecuniary

damages for amputation of leg with permanent disability of 50%

and above. The findings of this Court are reproduced

hereinunder:-

"17. From the aforenoted judicial decisions, a trend which emerges is that between the years 1985 and 1990, the courts have been awarding about Rs.3,00,000/- under the head „non-pecuniary damages‟ for amputation of leg resulting in permanent disability of 50 per cent and above."

8. Following the aforesaid judgment, the non-pecuniary

compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.3,00,000/-

under the following heads:-

(i) Compensation for pain and : Rs.1,00,000/-

suffering

(ii) Compensation for loss of : Rs.1,00,000/-

amenities of life

(iii) Compensation for disability and : Rs.1,00,000/-

disfigurement Total : Rs.3,00,000/-

9. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that

Rs.1,00,000/- received by the appellant from United India

Insurance Company Limited under the „Group Personal Accident

Policy‟ be adjusted. The original Group Personal Accident Policy

has been produced by the learned counsel for the appellant and

the same is taken on record.

10. Following the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the

case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Patricia Jeans

Mahajan (2002) 6 SCC 281, the appellant is entitled to

adjustment of Rs.1,00,000/- made by the appellant to respondent

No.1.

11. Respondent No.1 is entitled to total compensation of

Rs.9,68,923/- (Rs.7,08,510/- towards loss of income +

Rs.3,00,000/- towards non-pecuniary compensation + Rs.50,413/-

towards medical expenses + Rs.10,000 towards special diet and

conveyance - Rs.1,00,000/-).

12. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is dismissed and the

cross-objections are allowed. The award amount is enhanced

from Rs.8,79,513/- to Rs.9,68,923/- along with interest @7.5% per

annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.

13. The enhanced award amount be deposited by the appellant

with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch A/c Suraj Bhan through

Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal,

Parliament Street, New Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) within 30

days.

14. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

amount awarded by the learned Tribunal has been deposited with

UCO Bank on 12th December, 2009. The amount deposited is

Rs.12,32,234/-.

15. The UCO Bank is directed to keep a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- in

fixed deposit in the following manner:-

(i) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of six months.

(ii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of one year.

(iii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of one and a half years.

(iv) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of two years.

(v) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of two and a half years.

(vi) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of three years.

(vii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of three and a half years.

(viii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of four years.

(ix) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of four and a half years.

(x) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of five years.

(xi) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of five and a half years.

(xii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of six years.

(xiii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of six and a half years.

(xiv) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of seven years.

(xv) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of seven and a half

years.

(xvi) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of eight years.

(xvii) Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of eight and a half years.

(xviii)Fixed deposit for Rs.50,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of nine years.

(xix) Fixed deposit for Rs.1,00,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of nine and a half years.

(xx) Fixed deposit for Rs.1,00,000/- in the name of

respondent No.1 for a period of ten years.

16. The remaining amount be released to respondent No.1 by

transferring the same to his Saving Bank Account.

17. The interest on all the aforesaid fixed deposits shall be paid

monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Savings Account of

respondent No.1.

18. No cheque book be issued to respondent No.1 without the

permission of this Court.

19. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be retained by the

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

be given to respondent No.1 along with the photocopy of the

FDRs.

20. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be handed over to

respondent No.1 at the expiry of the fixed deposit.

21. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said

fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this Court.

22. Half yearly statement of account be filed by the Bank in this

Court.

23. On the request of respondent No.1, the Bank shall transfer

the Savings Account to any other branch of UCO Bank according

to the convenience of respondents No.1.

24. Respondents No.1 shall furnish all the relevant documents

for opening of the Saving Bank Account and Fixed Deposit

Account to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank

Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi.

25. List for directions as to disbursement of the enhanced

award amount on 9th April, 2010.

26. Copy of the order be given dasti to counsel for both the

parties under the signatures of the Court Master.

27. Copy of this order be also sent to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-

Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi

(Mobile No. 09310356400) through the UCO Bank, High Court

Branch under the signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J

JANUARY 29, 2010 aj