Delhi High Court
Rajwati Dagar & Ors. vs National Insurance Company Ltd. & ... on 29 August, 2011
Author: Indermeet Kaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 29.08.2011
+ MAC Appeal No. 120/2010
RAJWATI DAGAR & ORS. ...........Appellants
Through: Mr. Kundan Kumar , Advocate.
Versus
NATIONAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD. & ANR. ..........Respondents
Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa and Ms.
Angana Goswami, Advocated.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Yes
INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 This appeal has challenged the Award dated 06.08.2009
where total compensation of Rs. 10,12,000 had been awarded to
the claimants of the victim Bijender Singh. The claimants were
widow, 4 minor children and the parents of the victim. The
petitioner is aggrieved by the amount awarded under the head of
"loss of dependency" which is Rs. 8,07,000/-. The other heads i.e.
non pecuniary head for "loss of love and affection ", "loss of
consortium", "funeral expenses" and "loss of estate" are not
assailed. Contention of the petitioner is that he was a permanent
employee earning a salary of Rs. 6,000/- per month and was
working with the Industrial Security Force a registered
organization having its office at Gurgaon; the certificate appended
in the list of documents filed before the Tribunal evidenced that
he was hardworking; he had been working in that organization
for almost about two years prior to his death; his income tax
return had also been filed for the financial year 2002-2003
showing his gross salary at Rs. 6,000/- per month i.e. actual
income of Rs.72,000/- per annum. The contention of the appellant
is that in view of the Judgment of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC &
Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, since the deceased was of 43
years of age at the time to his death he was entitled to 30%
increase in the context of future prospect on the actual income
which was he drawing at the time of his death; impugned Award
has failed to consider this in the correct perspective.
2 This submission is negatived by the counsel for the
respondent who states that the impugned Award in no manner
calls for any interference. The ratio of the aforenoted judgment
has been considered in its correct perspective.
3 The Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) has held
that keeping in view the imponderables and uncertainties of life
as a thumb rule an addition of 50% of actual salary to the actual
salary income of the deceased should be added towards future
prospects where the deceased has a permanent job and is below
40 years, an addition of 30 % should be added if the age of the
deceased is between 40 to 50 years. Learned counsel for the
respondent has vehemently argued that the Apex Court had also
noted that where the deceased is self-employed or on a fix salary
the courts will usually take into account only the actual income at
the time of death; a departure therefrom should be made only in
rare case.
4 The record which has been filed before the Tribunal shows
that the deceased was aged 43 years and was working for about
last two years in the aforenoted organization. i.e. Industrial
Security Force Organization which is an expert body in Security
and Consultancy; office is registered at Kapashera, Gurgaon; the
certificate appended in the list of documents shows that the
deceased-victim was working as a field officer for the last almost
two years; he had been certified to be a good and hard working
personnel; there is no reason to dispute the submission of the
appellant that in these circumstance, the job of the petitioner was
not of a permanent nature. Evidence led shows that his work
would be of a permanent nature; there is also no reason to pre-
suppose that he would not earn any future increment; there was
every likelihood of the petitioner having an enhanced income in
the future.
5 In the aforenoted background, the Tribunal in not
considering the ratio of Sarla Verma(supra) and not granting
future increments to the actual salary of the victim suffers from an
infirmity; it is accordingly set aside.
6 The modified computation under the head of "loss of
dependency" is accordingly read as under:
Rs. 6000/- + Rs. 1800(30% of Rs. 6000/-) = Rs. 7,800/- - Rs. 1560/-
(1/5th of Rs. 7,800/-) = Rs. 6240 x 12x 14 = Rs. 10,48,320/-
7 The sum of Rs. 10,48,320/- is accordingly the now modified
figure in place of the figure of Rs. 8,07,000/- (rounded off) which
had been awarded by the Tribunal under this head. The other
heads i.e. "loss of love and affection", "loss of consortium",
"funeral expenses", are not the subject matter of challenge before
this court.
8 Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
AUGUST 29, 2011
rb
