Nirmala & Ors. vs Pankaj Kumar & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 4767 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                               Date of decision: 14th August, 2012
+        MAC. APP. 749/2012

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


                                      versus

         PANKAJ KUMAR & ORS.                             ..... Respondents
                     Through            Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Adv. for R-4.


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

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `20,80,400/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Appellants for the death of Ashok Kumar who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 13.11.2009.

2. The short ground of challenge is that the Appellant was working as an Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) in Delhi Police. He was aged a little more than 51 years. There were six dependents. The Claims Tribunal held that the Appellants No.2,3 and 4 were not dependents on the deceased.

3. Appellants No.2 and 3 were the unmarried daughters whereas Appellant No.4 was the unmarried son aged 18 years doing his B.Com at the time of the accident. The deceased had the responsibility to marry of Appellants

No.2 and 3. Appellant No.4 was still a student and was therefore, fully dependent on his deceased's father.

4. The Claims Tribunal, it is contended, ought to have made an addition of 30% towards the future prospects as the deceased was only about 51 years.

5. On the other hand, it is urged by the learned counsel for the Respondent Insurance Company that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable.

6. In Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 the Supreme Court held that where the number of dependents are 4 to 6, there has to be deduction of one-fourth of the deceased's income towards his personal and living expenses. Similarly, no addition towards future prospects can be made where the deceased is more than 50 years. There is no evidence that the deceased was immediately entitled to any promotion. Thus, this case cannot be taken as an exception to Sarla Verma and no addition towards future prospects can be made.

7. The loss of dependency thus comes to `22,84,161/- (24,247/- x 12 -

14,096/- (income tax) x 3/4 x 11) as against `20,80,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

8. The award of compensation under non-pecuniary heads is inconsonance with Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121; Baby Radhika Gupta v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2009) 17 SCC 627; and Sunil Sharma v. Bachitar Singh (2011) 11 SCC

425.

9. Thus, the compensation stands enhanced by `2,03,761/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till its payment.

10. Respondent No.4 National Insurance Company Ltd. is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, New Delhi within six weeks.

11. The enhanced compensation shall enure for the benefit of the First Appellant.

12. 75% of the enhanced compensation along with proportionate interest shall be held in fixed deposit for a period of two years, four years, six years and eight years in equal proportion. Rest shall be released on deposit.

13. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

14. Pending Applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE AUGUST 14, 2012 vk