Chanderkanta Nasa & Ors. vs Farid Ahmed & Ors.
2011 Latest Caselaw 6287 Del

$~6
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                    Date of decision: 21st December, 2011
+       MAC APP. 501/2011

        CHANDERKANTA NASA & ORS.          ..... Appellants
               Through: Mr. O. P. Mannie, Adv.

                                    Versus

        FARID AHMED & ORS.                  ..... Respondents
                 Through: Mr. L. K. Tyagi, Adv. for R-3.

        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                            JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellants seek enhancement of compensation amounting to ` 16,56,200/- awarded by the Tribunal by an award dated 19.11.2010. The only grievance is that the deceased was in settled employment. His salary was continuously increasing. He joined as Senior Modeler with M/s. V. M. Informatics yet his future prospects of 30% considering his age to be 47 years in view of Sarla Varma v. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121 were not taken into consideration.

2. I have perused the records. The Tribunal while declining future prospects opined that the deceased was not in a permanent job. This finding to my mind is erroneous. The record produced

before the Tribunal revealed that the deceased's salary with this company was increasing every month. It can be tabulated hereunder: -

S. No. Financial Year Income/ per month

1. 01.04.2006 to 31.03.2007 ` 8,000/-

2. 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008 ` 9,100/-

3. 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2009 ` 10,400/-

4. 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010 ` 12,200/-

5. 01.04.2010 onwards ` 14,600/-

3. It is apparent that the deceased's salary increased from ` 8,000/-

to ` 14,600/- including a sum of ` 1,000/- towards conveyance allowance. It is established on record that the deceased was in a stable employment and was, therefore, entitled to future prospects to the extent of 30% of his income. Of course, income tax was to be deducted from the deceased's salary. The loss of dependency on revised computation would come to ` 20,46,954/- (13,600 + 30% x 12 - ` 2,216/- (income tax) x 13

- ¼).

4. The enhanced compensation of ` 3,90,754/- shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from 19.11.2010 till the date of payment.

Respondent No.3 Insurance Co. is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest within six weeks.

5. A sum of ` 50,000/- along with interest be released in favour of Appellant No.1 forthwith. Rest of the amount shall equally be distributed amongst Appellants No.2 to 4 along with interest.

6. The appeal is allowed in above terms. No costs.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE DECEMBER 21, 2011 hs