Delhi High Court
Smt. Santosh Vashisht & Ors. vs Shri Ram Nath & Anr. on 2 December, 2011
Author: G.P. Mittal
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 2nd December, 2011
+ MAC APP. 200/2004
SMT. SANTOSH VASHISHT & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. S. C. Singhal, Adv.
Versus
SHRI RAM NATH & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: (Appearance not given)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. This appeal is for enhancement of compensation in respect of
death of S. C. Vashisht, who was aged 42 years at the time of
accident, which took place on 26.08.1999. The Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (the Tribunal) by the impugned award granted
a compensation of ` 9,40,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum
from the date of filing of the petition till 31.03.2001 and
thereafter 9% per annum till 31.03.2003 and thereafter 6% per
annum till the date of actual payment.
2. A short submission has been raised during the course of
arguments. Admittedly, the deceased was working in a
pharmaceutical company, which was owned by the family of
the claimants. He was getting a salary of ` 60,000/- per annum.
The Tribunal added 50% towards future prospects and on
applying a suitable multiplier and adding the notional sum
towards conventional heads like loss of love and affection, loss
of estate, funeral expenses awarded a compensation of `
9,40,000/-.
3. It was proved in inquiry before the Tribunal that a Bus was
purchased by the deceased in August, 1998 and it started
running under DTC Operation. The Income Tax Return for the
year 2000-2001 i.e. in respect of the year when the accident
took place also increased to ` 98,910/-. The Tribunal was
convinced that there was some income from plying the Bus, but
did not award any compensation for the personal supervision by
the deceased as the Tribunal held that the Bus was transferred to
the widow on deceased's death and she could have similar
income from running the Bus.
4. Since the deceased was earning about ` 60,000/- and in the year
of his death the income increased to ` 98,000/- and only `
60,000/- was considered as the deceased's income. It can safely
be said that there was substantial income from running the Bus.
It can be assumed that the deceased was performing some
supervisory duties in looking after the employees i.e. driver,
conductor and maintenance of the Bus. It has come in PW-1's
testimony that the deceased was a commerce graduate. The
minimum wages of graduate on the date of the accident were `
3,108/-. I assum that 1/4th of his working day was spent on
looking after the plying the Bus. The deceased's income from
the supervisory duties could be assumed to be ` 3,108 / 4 = 777.
If 1/3rd out of this assumed income is deducted towards personal
expenses the net income available would be ` 518/- per month
or ` 6,216/- per annum. The deceased was 42 years at the time
of the accident. On applying a multiplier of '14' the additional
compensation works out to be ` 87,024/- rounded off ` 87,000/-.
5. In view of the foregoing discussion I award additional
compensation of ` 87,024/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum
from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the
amount. Respondent No.2 National Insurance Co. Ltd. is
directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with
interest within six weeks. The enhanced compensation shall be
equally payable to Appellants No.1, 2, 3 & 5. 50% of the
amount shall be released in cash and rest of the amount shall be
held in the form of FDR for a period of 2 years.
6. The appeal is allowed and award modified in above terms. No
costs.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 02, 2011
hs
