National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Saroj And Others
2010 Latest Caselaw 4666 Del

                                                      UNREPORTABLE

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                         MAC App. No.300/2009


                                     Date of Decision: October 04, 2010


       NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD             ..... Appellants
                      through Mr. L.K.Tyagi, Advocate

                   versus


       SAROJ AND OTHERS                     ..... Respondents
                     through Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate for
                     respondents No.1 to 6.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA

1.     Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
       judgment? No
2.     To be referred to the reporter or not? No
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in the „Digest‟? No

REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL)

This appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance

Company Limited against the award of the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal dated March 24, 2009 awarding a total compensation of

` 19,53,832/- along with interest thereon @ 7.5% per annum to

respondents No.1 to 6 being the dependents of Lance Naik Vijay Pal

Singh who died in a road accident on August 26, 2000.

The deceased Vijay Pal Singh was getting a salary of ` 5,137/-

per month at the time of his death. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

for the purpose of calculating dependency of the claimants upon the

deceased has assumed his salary as ` 25,000/- per month relying upon

the evidence of PW-3. The said PW-3 had deposed that the deceased

was 10 years senior to him and in due course of time, he would have

got promoted to the rank of Subedar Major and in that rank he would

have drawn a salary of ` 18,000/- per month. He had further deposed

that at the time of his retirement, his salary would have gone up to

` 25,000/- per month. In view of this evidence, the salary of the

deceased was taken as ` 25,000/- per month and ` 5,137/- were added

to it being the salary which he was drawing at the time of his death.

The figure so arrived at was divided by two in order to calculate the

average monthly income of the deceased which came to ` 15,069/-.

From out of this average monthly income, 1/3rd was deducted towards

the personal expenses of the deceased and the balance which came to

` 10,046/- was treated as the monthly dependency of the claimants

upon him. The same was multiplied by 12 in order to calculate the

annual dependency which came to ` 1,20,552/-. To this figure, the

multiplier of 12 was applied in order to determine the total

dependency which worked out to ` 19,28,832/-. Besides, a sum of

` 25,000/- was awarded towards funeral expenses and loss of love and

affection. In this way, the total compensation of ` 19,53,832/- was

calculated by the Tribunal.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has made the aforementioned

calculation by ignoring the mandate of the Supreme Court in the case

of Sarla Verma and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and

Another, reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121.

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned counsel for the

claimants that they have through the evidence of PW-3 proved the

future prospects of the deceased and there is no justification in not

taking the income of the deceased as ` 25,000/- per month. It is,

however, not disputed by the learned counsel that in case of Sarla

Verma (supra), the Supreme Court has said that, "in view of the

imponderables and uncertainties, we are in favour of adopting as a rule

of thumb, an addition of 50% of actual salary to the actual salary

income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased

had a permanent job and was below 40 years."

Having regard to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case

of Sarla Verma (supra), the compensation as awarded by the Claims

Tribunal is liable to be modified. The Supreme Court has clearly said

that the addition of 50% only can be made to the actual income of the

deceased towards future prospects. In this view of the matter, I take

the basis of the income of the deceased as ` 5,137/- per month with

50% addition to it towards future prospects. The Tribunal has

deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased which,

I feel, should have been 1/4th as he has left behind not one not two but

six dependents.

It is agreed by both counsels that if compensation is calculated

by taking ` 5,137/- as the basis of the income of the deceased and 50%

is added to it towards future prospects and 1/4 th is deducted towards

the personal expenses of the deceased, the total compensation

payable to the claimants comes to ` 11,09,568/-.

The learned counsel for the claimants submits that nothing has

been paid towards loss of consortium. He also submits that the

claimants have not been adequately compensated for loss of love and

affection.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

including the fact that the deceased has left behind six dependents

who shall forever remain deprived of his love and affection, I award a

further sum of ` 1,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection and loss

of consortium. With this addition of ` 1,50,000/- the total

compensation payable to the claimants comes to ` 12,59,568/-. They

shall also be entitled to interest on the sum of ` 12,59,568/- @ 7.5%

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

It is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that a sum of

` 15,00,000/- along with interest is lying in deposit with the UCO Bank.

The UCO Bank is directed to refund the excess amount, if any, to the

appellant. The Registry is directed to refund the statutory amount of

` 25,000/- to the counsel for the appellant.

The compensation as awarded today shall be disbursed in terms

of the award of the Tribunal.

The appeal is disposed of.

REKHA SHARMA, J.

OCTOBER 04, 2010 PC/ka