Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Vibha Devi & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 2228 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      Reserved on: 24th February, 2012
                                      Pronounced on: 30th March, 2012
+       MAC APP. 831/2011

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

                    versus

        VIBHA DEVI & ORS.                          .... Respondents
                      Through:         Mr. Sanjay Kumar Adv. for R-1
                                       to R-5.

        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                             JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J.

1. The Appellant seeks reduction of compensation of ` 10,73,000/-

awarded for the death of Rakesh Kumar who died in a motor accident which occurred on 23.12.2009.

2. During inquiry before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) it was claimed that the deceased was working as a labourer and was earning ` 4,500/- per month.

3. Vibha Devi (PW-1) the deceased's widow admitted during cross-examination that she did not have any documentary evidence with regard to the occupation and earning of the deceased. The minimum wages of an unskilled worker on the

date of the accident were ` 3953/- per month, on which addition of 50% was made on account of inflation, deduction of one- fourth was made towards the personal and living expenses and the multiplier was taken as '17' to compute the loss of dependency as ` 9,18,000/-.

4. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that since there was no evidence of future prospects no addition should have been made in the assumed income. It is contended that future inflation is built in the multiplier and no addition could have been made on that count. It is stated that award of ` 1,25,000/- towards loss of love and affection is excessive.

5. In Dhaneshwari & Another v. Tajeshwar Singh & Others, MAC.

APP 997/2011 decided on 19.3.2012, after noticing the Judgments of this Court in Smt. Anari Devi v. Shri Tilak Raj & Anr., II (2004) ACC 739; (2005 ACJ 1397), National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pooja & Ors., II (2006) ACC 382 (2007 ACJ 1051), Om Kumari & Ors. v. Shish Pal & Ors, 140 (2007) DLT 62, Narinder Bishal & Anr. v. Rambir Singh & Ors.,MAC APP. 1007-08/2006, decided on 20.02.2008, New India Assurance Co. Ld. v. Vijay Singh MAC APP. 280/2008 decided on 09.05.2008; Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Smt. Rajni Devi & Ors. MAC APP.286/2011 decided on 06.01.2012; Smt. Gulabeeya Devi v. Mehboob Ali & Ors. MAC APP.463/2011 decided on 10.01.2012 and IFFCO TOKIO Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Rooniya Devi & Ors. MAC APP.189/2011 decided on

30.01.2012 and Division Bench Judgments of this Court in Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Kumari Lalita 22 (1982) DLT 170 (DB) and Rattan Lal Mehta v. Rajinder Kapoor & Anr. II (1996) ACC 1 (DB), this Court has held that in view of Rattan Lal Mehta (supra) increase in minimum wages cannot be given on account of future inflation.

6. The loss of dependency therefore has to be calculated on the basis of the deceased's income as per the Minimum Wages Act i.e. ` 3953/- per month rounded of to ` 4,000/- per month.

7. Thus, the loss of dependency comes to ` 6,12,000/- (4000/- x 3/4 x 12 x 17).

8. The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of `1,25,000/- towards Loss of Love and Affection. As 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.

9. The overall compensation is recomputed as under:-

Sl. No. Compensation under various Awarded by

heads this Court

1. Loss of Dependency ` 6,12,000/-

               2.       Loss of Love & Affection                         `25,000/-

               3.       Loss to Estate                                   ` 10,000/-

               4.       Loss of Consortium                               ` 10,000/-

               5.       Funeral Expenses                                 ` 10,000/-

                                                   Total            ` 6,67,000/-

10. The overall compensation is thus reduced from ` 10,73,000/- to ` 6,67,000/-.

11. The excess amount of `4,06,000/- along with the proportionate interest and the interest if any, accrued during the pendency of the Appeal shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

12. Statutory amount deposited shall also be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

13. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

14. Pending application also stands disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MARCH 30, 2012 vk