Delhi High Court
Icici Lombard General Ins. Co Ltd. vs Kiran Devi & Ors. on 17 January, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 17th January, 2012
+ MAC.APP. 851/2011
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INS. CO LTD. .... Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajat Brar, Adv.
versus
KIRAN DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appellant ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company
Limited seeks reduction in the award of compensation of `
6,14,750/- on the ground that there were just two dependants of
deceased Vipti Lal who was aged about 60 years at the time of
his death.
2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that since
the deceased was 60 years old, no addition on account of
inflation could have been made and there should have been
deduction of one-third towards the personal and living expenses
of the deceased as there were just two dependants.
3. It is contended that the award of compensation under the heads
of loss of love and affection and loss of consortium is excessive.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents
supports the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (the Tribunal) on the ground that the multiplier at the
age of 60 years is '9' whereas the Tribunal selected the
multiplier of '7' only.
5. I agree with the learned counsel for the Appellant that at the age
of 60 years, the benefit of future prospects for increase towards
inflation could not have been given. No evidence was led by
Respondents No.1 to 6 to show that apart from a widow and an
old mother any other claimant was dependant on the deceased.
Thus, the deduction of one-third should have been made
towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased.
6. I may mention that, where the Claimants are entitled to loss of
dependency on actual basis, normally a nominal sum is awarded
under the head of loss of love and affection. Loss of love and
affection can never be measured in terms of money. Thus,
uniformity has to be adopted by the Courts while granting non-
pecuniary damages. The Supreme Court in Sunil Sharma v.
Bachitar Singh (2011) 11 SCC 425 and in Baby Radhika Gupta
v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (2009) 17 SCC 627
granted only ` 25,000/- (in total to all the claimants) under the
head of loss of love and affection. Thus, I would reduce the
compensation under this head to ` 25,000/- only instead of `
50,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.
7. A sum of ` 25,000/- awarded towards the loss of consortium
was also on the higher side, as per Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, it should be
between ` 5,000/- to ` 10,000/- only.
8. The loss of dependency is re-assessed as ` 3,96,000/- (` 5500/- x
2 / 3 x 12 x 9). After adding a sum of ` 20,000/- towards funeral
expenses as granted by the Tribunal, ` 25,000/- towards loss of
love and affection, `10,000/- towards loss of consortium and `
10,000/- towards loss of estate, the overall compensation comes
to ` 4,61,000/-.
9. The compensation is reduced from ` 6,14,750/- to ` 4,61,000/-
and shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum as awarded by the
Tribunal. The amount shall be released in favour of the
Respondents in proportion as granted by the Tribunal and shall
be released/held in Fixed Deposits in UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch, New Delhi as stated in Para 17 to 29 of the
impugned judgment.
10. The excess amount alongwith the interest earned, if any, during
the pendency of the Appeal, shall be refunded to the Appellant
alongwith the statutory amount of ` 25,000/-.
11. The appeal is allowed in above terms. No costs.
12. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
JANUARY 17, 2012
vk
