Delhi High Court
Krishan Kumar & Anr. vs Banwari Lal & Ors. on 20 July, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
$~R-14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision:20th July, 2012
+ MAC. APP. No.294/2004
KRISHAN KUMAR & ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. V.P Katiyar, Advocate
Versus
BANWARI LAL & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa,
Advocate for the Respondents
No.3 & 5 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 `4,21,000/-
awarded in favour of the Appellants for the death of Amit
Aggarwal, a bachelor who died in a motor vehicle accident
which occurred on 21.01.1999.
2. The finding on negligence is not disputed by the Respondents
and has thus attained finality between the parties.
3. While dealing with the quantum of compensation, the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) declined to
believe the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D issued by the
deceased's employer. It, therefore, took the minimum wages of
a matriculate; tripled the amount towards future prospects,
deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses and applied
a multiplier of 11 to compute the loss of dependency.
4. Assailing the impugned award, the following contentions are
raised on behalf of the Appellants:
(i) The salary certificate Ex.PW1/D was duly proved by
PW2 examined by the Appellants. The Claims
Tribunal erred in declining to believe the salary of
`4,000/- per month on the basis of the salary
certificate Ex.PW1/D.
(ii) The age of the deceased's father on the date of his
examination in the Court on 17.02.2003 was 53
years, thus he was aged 49 years on the date of the
accident; the age of the mother would be a little less
than that. Thus, the appropriate multiplier as per the
age of the deceased's parents was '13' instead of '11'
as taken by the Claims Tribunal.
(iii) The Claims Tribunal made a deduction of 50%
towards personal and living expenses. Normally, a
deduction of 1/3rd is made under this head.
5. I have perused the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D. The deceased
Amit Aggarwal had passed All India Senior School
Examination (Class 12th) from CBSE in the Ist Division. He
was pursuing B.Com (P) from Delhi University as an external
candidate. PW2 Rajesh Tiwari's testimony regarding the
deceased's employment with Praveen Oil Company was not
challenged in the cross-examination. In the circumstances, the
Claims Tribunal erred in disbelieving the salary certificate
Ex.PW1/D. Relying on the same, I hold the deceased's income
at the time of the accident as `4,000/- per month.
6. A perusal of PW1 Krishan Kumar's testimony shows that he
was 53 years at the time of the recording of the testimony. The
Claims Tribunal took his age as on the date of recording of his
statement in the Court into consideration to apply the multiplier.
Since the accident took place in the year 1999, he was aged 49
years at the time of the accident. The deceased's mother might
be of the same age or a little younger to PW1. Thus, the
appropriate multiplier is '13' instead of '11' as adopted by the
Claims Tribunal.
7. The Claims Tribunal assumed the future income to be three
times to the deceased's income at the relevant time. This was
not permissible. The deceased was a young boy who was
working as an Accountant with M/s Praveen Oil Company. As
stated earlier, he passed his 12th Examination from CBSE
securing very good marks (Ex.PW1/B). He was pursuing
B.Com as an external candidate from Delhi University. In the
circumstances, his income would have at least doubled with the
passage of time. Thus, an addition of 50% was required to be
made towards future prospects instead of 100% made by the
Claims Tribunal.
8. Applying the above principles, the loss of dependency comes to
`4,68,000/-(`4000/- + 50% x 12 x 1 ÷ 2 x 13). On adding a
notional sum of `25,000/- towards loss of love and affection and
`10,000/- each towards loss to estate and funeral expenses, the
overall compensation comes to `5,13,000/-.
9. The enhanced compensation of `92,000/- shall carry interest @
9% per annum as awarded by the Claims Tribunal from the date
of the filing of the Petition till its payment. The enhanced
compensation shall be payable to the Appellants in equal shares.
This accident took place 13 years back and the Appellants are
approaching advance age. In the circumstances, 50% of the
enhanced compensation shall be held in Fixed Deposit for a
period of one year. Rest of the amount shall be released on
deposit.
10. The Respondent National Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest as stated
above in the name of the Appellants in UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch within six weeks.
11. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
12. Pending Applications stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
JULY 20, 2012
pst
