Icici Lombard General Insurance vs Ram Swaroop & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 919 Del

$~22
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                     Date of decision: 9th February, 2012
+         MAC.APP. 830/2011

          ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE
           CO LTD                         ..... Appellant
                        Through: Ms.Suman Bagga, Advocate

                      versus

          RAM SWAROOP & ORS             ..... Respondents
                       Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate
          CORAM:
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                               JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. seeks

reduction of the compensation of `5,07,500/- awarded for the

death of Jagdish Prasad who died in an accident on 20.02.2009.

2. In the Claim Petition under Section 163-A of the Motor

Vehicles Act filed before the Tribunal, the deceased's salary

was claimed to be `39,000/- per annum.

3. The Tribunal, however, took the deceased's income to be

`3934/- per month which was the wages of unskilled worker

under the Minimum Wages Act and added 50% towards

inflation; deducted 50% towards personal living expenses and

applied the multiplier of '17' to compute the loss of dependency

as `3,40,000/-, after adding a sum of `7,500/- towards Funeral

Expenses, `10,000/- towards Loss of Estate and `1,50,000/-

towards Loss of Consortium and Loss of the Love and

Affection. Overall compensation of `5,07,500/- was awarded.

4. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the

multiplier has to be adopted as per the age of the Claimant or

the deceased whichever is higher. It is urged that a sum of

`1,50,000/- which was awarded towards loss of love and

affection and loss of consortium was not permissible in a

petition u/s 163-A of the Act as Claimants are not required to

prove negligence on the part of the driver.

5. The deceased's income was claimed to be `39,000/- per annum

which is almost equal to the minimum wages of an unskilled

worker as on the date of the accident.

6. In a petition under Section 163-A of the Act, compensation has

to be awarded as per the structured formula (Deepal Girishbhai

Soni v. United India Insurance Company Limited, (2004) 5 SCC

385; Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Meena Variyal

(2007) 5 SCC 428; and Oriental Insurance Company v.

Hansrajbhai V. Kodala, (2001) 5 SCC 175).

7. As per the note appended to the Second Schedule 1/3rd of the

deceased's income was required to be deducted towards the

personal and living expenses. The appropriate multiplier when

a petition under Section 163-A of the Act is filed has to as per

Second Schedule which in the instant case would be '18' as the

deceased was less than 30 years. The compensation is to be re-

computed as under:-

Loss of Dependency: `4,68,000/-(` 39,000/- x 2/3 x18).

          Funeral Expenses :       `2,000/-

          Loss to Estate     :     `2,500/-

                   TOTAL     :     `4,72,500/-

8. The overall compensation is reduced from `5,07,500/- to

`4,72,500.

9. The excess amount along with interest earned, if any, during the

pendency of the Appeal shall be refunded to the Appellant

Insurance Company.

10. Statutory deposit of `.25,000/- shall also be refunded.

11. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

12. No costs.

13. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE FEBRUARY 09, 2012 mr