Delhi High Court
Sat Prakash & Ors vs Jagdish & Ors on 26 March, 2010
Author: J.R. Midha
27
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO 365/1999
Date of decision : 26th March, 2010
%
SAT PRAKASH & ORS ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. O.P. Mannie, Adv.
versus
JAGDISH & ORS ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.
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
1. The appellants have challenged the award of the
learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.1,17,600/-
has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek
enhancement of the award amount.
2. The accident dated 25th February, 1990 resulted in the
death of Bal Kishan. The deceased was survived by two
sons, one daughter, legal representatives of pre-deceased
daughter and mother who filed the claim petition before the
learned Tribunal.
3. The deceased was aged 50 years at the time of the
accident and was helping his father in agriculture and dairy
business. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the
deceased as Rs.881/- per month according to the minimum
wages and Rs.1,200/- per month from his agriculture work.
The total income of the deceased was taken at Rs.2,080/-
per month. 1/3rd was deducted towards his personal
expenses and the multiplier of 7 was applied to compute
the loss of dependency at Rs.1,17,600/-.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants has urged the
following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-
(i) The increase in minimum wages due to inflation
and rise in price index be taken into
consideration.
(ii) The personal expenses of the deceased be
reduced from 1/3rd to 1/4.
(iii) The multiplier be enhanced from 7 to 13.
(iv) The compensation be awarded for loss of love
and affection, loss of estate and funeral
expenses.
5. The increase in minimum wages due to inflation and
rise in price index is not warranted in the present case
because the Claims Tribunal has taken the minimum wages
of Rs.881/- per month and has added Rs.1,200/- per month
towards income from agriculture work.
6. According to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129, the appropriate
multiplier at the age of 50 years is 13 and the appropriate
deduction towards the personal expenses is 1/4th as the
deceased as left behind more than three legal
representatives.
7. Following the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, the multiplier is enhanced from 7 to 13 and
the deduction towards personal expenses is reduced from
1/3rd to 1/4th. Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards loss of love
and affection, Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate and
Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses.
8. Taking the income of the deceased as Rs.2,080/- per
month, deducting 1/4th towards his personal expenses,
applying the multiplier of 13, adding Rs.10,000/- towards
loss of love and affection, Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate
and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, the total
compensation is computed to be Rs.2,63,360/- [(Rs.2,080 x
12 x 3/4 x 13) + Rs.10,000 + Rs.5,000 + Rs.5,000]
9. The appeal is allowed with costs. The award amount
is enhanced from Rs.1,17,600/- to Rs.2,63,360/-. The
learned Tribunal has awarded interest @12% per annum
which is not disturbed on the original award amount of
Rs.1,17,600/-. However, on the enhanced award amount,
the rate of interest shall be @7.5% per annum from the
date of filing of the petition till realization. The cost of the
appeal is assessed at Rs.16,500/- based on the memo of
fees filed by the counsel for the appellant at the time of
hearing of this appeal. The shares of the appellants in the
award amount shall be as under:-
Sat Parkash - 20%
Anup Singh - 20%
Kuldip Singh - 6.66%
Minakshi - 6.67%
Manisha - 6.67%
Sudesh - 20%
Jaro - 20%
10. The learned counsel for the appellant and other
counsels present in the Court point out that the Claims
Tribunals do not award the cost of litigation in any matter as
a result of which the claimants have to bear the legal cost
out of the award amount. The learned counsels point out
that the cost of litigation should be separately awarded to
the claimants to be paid by the Insurance Companies. The
learned counsels further point out that after the disposal of
the case by the Claims Tribunals, the Insurance Companies
do not gracefully pay the legal fees even to their own
counsels for various considerations which are not being put
on record and the counsels suffer
harassment/embarrassment in following up the legal fees
after the disposal of the cases. It is submitted that the
counsels appearing in the Court are officers of the Court
and the agreed fees should be paid gracefully by all the
parties.
11. Considering that the lawyers are the officers of the
Court and they are entitled to their legal fees with dignity
and so far as the claimants are concerned, they are entitled
to the reasonable cost of litigation, it is desirable that
wherever the lawyer - client agreement is filed before or at
the time of final hearing of the case, the cost equivalent to
the reasonable fee may be awarded and the Insurance
Companies be directed to deposit the said cost by means of
a separate cheque in the name of the claimant's counsel to
be deposited with the Bank along with the award amount to
be released by the Bank directly to the counsel. The
Insurance companies should also deposit the fee of their
counsel by means of a separate cheque drawn in the name
of their counsel with the Bank simultaneously along with the
award amount to be released by the Bank to the Insurance
Company's counsel.
12. The enhanced award amount along with interest be
deposited by respondent No.3 with UCO Bank A/c Sat
Parkash, Delhi High Court Branch through Mr. M.M. Tandon,
Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street,
New Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) within 30 days. The
cost of Rs.16,500/- of this appeal be deposited by
respondent No.3 by means of separate cheque in the name
of O.P. Mannie, Advocate along with the deposit of the
enhanced award amount. The legal fee of the counsel for
respondent No.3 be also deposited with UCO Bank by
means of a separate cheque in the name of Mr. Pankaj Seth,
Advocate.
13. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, the UCO Bank
is directed to release 50% of the share amount to the
appellants by transferring the same to their respective
Saving Bank Account and the remaining amount be kept in
fixed deposit for a period of one year with cumulative
interest. The cheque towards the cost and legal fees be
released by UCO Bank to the respective counsels for the
appellants and respondent No.3.
14. The original Fixed Deposit Receipts shall be retained
by the Bank in the safe custody. However, the original Pass
Book shall be given to the respective appellants along with
the photocopy of the FDRs.
15. On the expiry of the period of the FDRs, the maturity
amount be paid to the appellants by transferring the same
to the Saving Bank Account of respective appellants.
16. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on
the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this
Court.
17. On the request of the appellants, the Bank shall
transfer the Savings Account to any other branch of UCO
Bank according to the convenience of the appellants.
18. The appellants 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.
19. Copy of the order be given dasti to counsel for both
the parties under the signatures of the Court Master.
20. The copy of this order be sent to all the Claims
Tribunal and Additional District Judges dealing with MACT
cases through Registrar (Appellate) of this Court.
21. 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
MARCH 26, 2010
mk
