Delhi High Court
Usha Rani Jain & Ors. vs Raj Pal & Ors. on 1 June, 2010
Author: Shiv Narayan Dhingra
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: April 23, 2010
Date of Order: June 01, 2010
+ FAO 79/1996
% 01.06.2010
Usha Rani Jain & Ors. ...Appellants
Through: Mr. Varun Kumar & Mr. Navneet Goel, Advocate
Versus
Raj Pal & Ors. ...Respondents
Through: Mr.J.N. Aggarwal and Mr. Mayank Joshi, Advocates for DTC
Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advocate for R-3
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?
JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal has been filed by claimants being aggrieved by the award
dated 5th October 1995 passed by learned Tribunal whereby the learned Tribunal
awarded a compensation of Rs.2,40,000/- to the claimants on account of death of Shri
Laxmi Chand Jain. It is contended by the appellants that the Tribunal wrongly held that
the liability of the insurance company was limited to Rs.50,000/- only.
2. The deceased in this case was allegedly running a shop and dealing in tea leafs.
He was not an income tax payee. The total annual sale at the shop between 1983 to
1987 in terms of sale tax returns was between Rs.1,82,000/- to Rs.2,96,000/- per
annum. It has also co me on record that sons of the deceased were also in the same
business and running the same shop and even after death of deceased, the shop
continued to be run by the sons of deceased. The learned Tribunal after taking into
account the entire evidence and the annual sales, came to conclusion that his income at
FAO 79 of 1996 Usha Rani Jain & Ors. v. Raj Pal & Ors. Page 1 Of 4
the time of death must be around Rs.1500/- per month and this, in my view, was a right
assessment. The annual sales on the shop were of Rs.2,50,000/-. If 10% of the sales is
considered as the normal profit in tealeaf business, the annual income from the shop
would have been around Rs.25,000/- and since sons of the deceased were also working
on the same shop and the shop had to meet other expenses, the income of the
deceased was rightly assessed around Rs.1500/- per month.
3. The Tribunal deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses. It is submitted by the
appellant that the deceased has left behind his widow and two sons and two daughters
and mother. Therefore, the deduction towards his personal expenses should have been
1/4th. I consider that this argument must fail. Two sons of the deceased were not only
married but were working and were not dependent on him. Nothing has been stated
about the daughters. Even if it is believed that the daughters were dependent on him
apart from widow and mother. The dependents on the deceased were four and even as
per Sarla Varma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.;(2009) 6 SCC 121, the
deductions on account of personal expenses would be 1/3rd. The Tribunal while
calculating compensation took income of the deceased as Rs.3000/- per month instead
of Rs.1500 and then deducted 1/3rd. However, view of Sarla Varma's case, as the age of
deceased was above 50 years, no future prospects were liable to be added and since
the deceased was in business, only the actual income was to be taken into account.
Thus, the Tribunal in fact calculated compensation by doubling the income and it cannot
be said that the Tribunal in any manner awarded less compensation or unjust
compensation. If the parameters of Sarla Varma's case(supra) had been applied, the
compensation would have been just half. I, therefore, consider that no case is made out
for enhancement of compensation. The appeal of appellants on this count must fail.
3. The Tribunal had observed that the premium paid by insurer in this case was
FAO 79 of 1996 Usha Rani Jain & Ors. v. Raj Pal & Ors. Page 2 Of 4
Rs.240/- since it was not pleaded that any extra premium had been paid, the liability of
insurance company was limited to Rs.50,000/-. I consider that this part of award passed
by Tribunal is contrary to Motor Vehicles Act as well as contrary to Tariff Regulations.
The Motor Vehicle act, 1939 was amended in October 1982 and the minimum liability of
the insurance companies was increased from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.1,50,000/-. Accident in
this case had taken place in 1985. Thus, the minimum statutory obligation of the
insurance company in case the vehicle was insured for 'act only' policy was
Rs.1,50,000/-. As per the Tariff Regulations, the premium for act only policy was
Rs.200/- and the premium for public risk policy was Rs.240/- per month. (Tariff Table is
given below):
CLASS A (2) - GOODS CARRYING VEHICLES-GENERAL
CARTAGE (PUBLIC CARRIER)
PREMIUM FOR
Licensed Carrying 'Own Damage' Liability to 'Act
Capacity of the Cover the Public Only'
Vehicle Risks
(a) Not exceeding Rs.340 Plus Rs.120/- Rs.100/-
1016 Kgs. (1 Ton) 1.05% on I.E.V.
(b) Not exceeding Rs.550 Plus Rs.240/- Rs.200/-
3048 Kgs. (3 Tons) 1.10% on I.E.V.
(c) Not exceeding Rs.850 1.10% Rs.240/- Rs.200/-
5080 Kgs. (5 Tons) on I.E.V.
(d) Exceeding 5080 Rs.850 plus Rs.240/- Rs.200/-
Kgs. (5 Tons) Rs.200 for each
additional 1016
Kgs. (1 Ton) or
part thereof plus
1.10 on I.E.V.
N.B.: Vide Note to IMT Endorsement No.26 special Exclusions
(Commercial Vehicles Policies only)
4. I, therefore, consider that the liability of the insurance company in this case was
unlimited in view of the judgment of this Court in F.A.O. No.257 of 1991 Neeta Trehan &
Ors. Vs. Gopal Krishan & Ors., decided on 17th May, 2010.
FAO 79 of 1996 Usha Rani Jain & Ors. v. Raj Pal & Ors. Page 3 Of 4
5. In the result, the appeal, for enhancement of compensation is dismissed.
However, appeal is allowed to the effect that liability of insurance company was not
limited to Rs.50,000/- but it was unlimited. The appeal stands disposed of and the
insurance company was liable to pay the entire compensation as awarded by Tribunal.
The insurance company is directed to pay the awarded amount along with interest after
adjusting the amount already paid within six weeks.
June 01, 2010 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.
rd
FAO 79 of 1996 Usha Rani Jain & Ors. v. Raj Pal & Ors. Page 4 Of 4
