Delhi High Court
Prabhawati & Ors vs New India Assurancec Co Ltd & Ors on 31 July, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 31st July, 2012
+ MAC 445/2010
PRABHAWATI & ORS ..... Appellant
Through Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Advocate
versus
NEW INDIA ASSURANCEC CO LTD & ORS..... Respondent
Through Nemo
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `11,02,850/- for
the death of Jaishree, who died in a motor vehicle accident which
occurred on 8th July, 2006.
2. The Claims Tribunal accepted the deceased's income as `8998/-
deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses and applied the multiplier of
'13' taking the age of the deceased as 47 years (as per ration card).
3. The only ground of challenge raised during the hearing of the appeal is
that the deceased's salary by way of additional evidence and the last
pay certificate Ex.AW-1/2 is established as `18,006/-. The Appellants
were entitled to award compensation on the basis of the salary which
was retrospectively revised w.e.f. 1.1.2006 on implementation of the
6th Pay Commission.
4. I would agree with the learned counsel for the Appellant that the
salary which is revised retrospectively is the actual salary. This must
be considered to compute the loss of dependency.
5. At the same time, it transpires that the age of the deceased was taken
as 47 years for granting loss of dependency. As per Ex.AW1/1 proved
at the time of additional evidence recorded before the Registrar, the
deceased's date of birth is 15th December, 1952. Thus, the deceased
was 54 years on the date of the accident. In the circumstances, the
appropriate multiplier would be '11' as against '13' taken by the
Claims Tribunal.
6. I have before me, the salary certificate Ex.AW1/2, showing the
deceased's gross salary as `18,006/- on 8th July, 2006. This included a
sum of `230/- towards washing allowance which is required to be
deducted being an allowance personal to the deceased and incidental
to the employment.
7. On applying the principles as laid down in Sarla Verma & Ors. v.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, the loss of
dependency comes to `16,69,074/- (1776 x12 - 11,000/- (income tax)
x 3/4 x 11).
8. The Appellants are further entitled to a sum of `25000/- towards loss
of love and affection and `10,000/- each towards loss of consortium,
loss to estate and funeral expenses. The overall compensation comes
to `17,24,074/-.
9. There is an enhancement of `6,21,224/-, which shall carry interest @
8% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its payment.
10. The Respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced amount with Claims Tribunal within six weeks.
11. 10% of the enhanced compensation shall be payable to each of
Appellant Nos. 2 to 5. Rest 60% shall enure for benefit of the First
Appellant.
12. 80% of the compensation awarded to the First Appellant shall be held
in fixed deposit for a period of two years, four years, six years and
eight years in equal proportions. 20% shall be released to her on
deposit.
13. 50% of the compensation awarded to the Appellant Nos. 2 to 5 shall
be held in fixed deposit for a period of two years. Rest 50% shall be
released to them on deposit.
14. It goes without saying that the Claims Tribunal shall be at liberty to
deal with any application for premature withdrawal of the amount
ordered to be held in fixed deposit on its own merits.
15. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
16. No costs.
17. Dasti.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
JULY 31, 2012
rs
