Bhama Rani & Ors vs National Insurance Co.Ltd.
2012 Latest Caselaw 4573 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                            Decided on: 1st August, 2012
+       MAC.APP. 336/2004

        BHAMA RANI & ORS.                        ..... Appellants
                     Through             Mr. D.S. Dalal, Advocate

                     versus


        NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.         ..... Respondent
                     Through Mr. Manoj R. Sinha, Advocate
                             for Respondent No.1 Insurance
                             Company.


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

                              JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `3,69,550/-

awarded for the death of Yogesh Kumar Gupta, who was bachelor aged 23 years, who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 6th December, 1998.

2. In the absence of any Appeal by the driver/owner or the insurer, the finding on negligence has attained finality.

3. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the compensation awarded is too meager. It is contended that Mr.

Yogesh was a young boy of 23 years who started working as a contractor in May, 1998 and met with an unfortunate accident on 6th December, 1998 resulting into his death. He had an income of `89,893/- for a period only of seven months. He was awarded contracts in November, and December, 1998 which he could not execute because of his untimely death. It is urged that the Claims Tribunal had not granted any future prospects.

4. On the other hand, it is stated by the learned counsel for the Respondent Insurance Company that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable as per the Income Tax Return for the assessment year 1999-2000 which showed an income of `89,893/-.

5. I have before me, the affidavit of Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, who appeared as PW-1. He testified that his son Yogesh started working as an independent contractor in May, 1998. He was awarded a contract for `20,20,000/- (Ex. PW-1/10) by M/s. Bansal Estate Pvt. Ltd. on 12th May, 1998. The work to the extent of `11,20,000/- was completed by the time Yogesh died. He further proved the contract for `6,00,000/-(Ex. PW-1/12) awarded to the deceased on 1st December, 1998 and another contract for `10,00,000/- (Ex. PW-1/13) awarded on 26th November, 1998.

6. It is evident from the Income Tax Return (Ex. PW 1/14) that tax was deducted at source on the amount of `11,20,000/-, i.e., the

work already carried out by the deceased and adjustment of the TDS was made in the Income Tax Return.

7. From the documents and testimony of PW-1, it is established that the income of `89,893/- was only for a period of seven months (i.e., from 12th May, 1998 to 6th December, 1998 when the deceased died).

8. From the testimony of PW-1 and the documents Exs. PW-1/10, PW-1/11 and PW-1/12, it is apparent that the deceased was already executing the contract for `20,20,000/- and part of this had already been executed by him. He had further contracts for `6,00,000/- and `10,00,000/-. Thus, the Appellants were able to prove that the deceased had a very bright future.

9. On the basis of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors. (1994) 2 SCC 176, Sarla Dixit v. Balwant Yadav, (1996) 3 SCC 179 and Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, the Appellants are entitled to an addition of 50% in the deceased's income to compute the loss of dependency.

10. The loss of dependency comes to `1,418,571/- (89,893x12/7-

19,000/-(income tax) +50% x 1/2 x14). The Appellants are further entitled to a sum of ` 25,000/- towards loss of love and affection and `10,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. The compensation thus comes to `14,63,571/-.

11. There is an enhancement of `10,94,021/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment. The enhanced compensation shall be equally apportioned between the Appellants.

12. The enhanced compensation shall be deposited by the Respondent Insurance Company with the Claims Tribunal within six weeks and shall be released on deposit.

13. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

14. Pending Applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE AUGUST 01, 2012 rs