Kusum Lata & Anr vs Mohd Ishrar & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 120 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Decided on: 6th January, 2012
+       MAC APP. 21/2012

        KUSUM LATA & ANR                        ..... Appellant
                       Through:         Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
                versus

        MOHD ISHRAR & ORS                        ..... Respondent
                     Through:           Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv.
                                        for R-2/ Insurance Company.
        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                           JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Appellants seek enhancement of compensation for the death of Saurav Sateria who lost his life in accident which took place on 21.10.2007. The ground of challenge is that although the deceased was a young entrepreneur who had returned an income of Rs.1,18,350/- in the very first year, but his future prospects have not been considered by the Tribunal.

2. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the Appellants has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Dalvinder Kaur @ Devinder v. United India Insurance Company Limited, IV (2010) ACC 365, Baby Radhika Gupta v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2009) 17 SCC 627, and R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal, 2009 (8) Scale 451.

3. Dalvinder Kaur (supra) related to the death of a Building Contractor who was 38 years old and there was evidence that his income was increasing from year to year. Baby Radhika Gupta (supra) is not a precedent on future prospects as a lump sump amount of ` 2 lac was granted towards future prospects in the pecuniary facts and circumstances of that case. Similarly, R.K. Malik (supra) related to 23 school going children where notional income of `15,000/- per annum was taken for computation of loss of dependency and a lump sump compensation of `75,000/- was awarded towards the future prospects.

4. It was not a case where the compensation was awarded on the basis of minimum wages. When compensation is claimed on actual income, the deceased or the victim has to be either in suitable employment or there should be evidence as to the future prospects.

5. In the instant case, the Tribunal followed Sarla Verma (supra), took the deceased's income as Rs.1,20,000/- per annum as against the Income Tax Return of Rs.1,18,350/-, deducted 50% towards personal living expenses and applied the multiplier of 14 as per the age of the deceased's mother. The Tribunal granted a compensation of ` 10,000/- each towards loss of love and affection, loss of estate and funeral expenses.

6. The overall compensation of Rs.8,70,000/- granted by the

Tribunal is just and reasonable.

7. There is no ground to interfere in the impugned award.

8. The Appeal being devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE

JANUARY, 06, 2012 vk