National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Rajni Manocha & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 2230 Del

R-6(part-III)
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +    MAC.APP.No.685/2005

     %                          Reserve on : 3rd February, 2012
                               Date of decision : 30th March, 2012

      NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..........Appellant
               Through : Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Adv.

                      versus

      RAJNI MANOCHA & ORS.                  .......Respondents
               Through : None.

CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

                               JUDGMENT

1. The appellant has challenged the order of learned

Tribunal whereby the compensation of `6,11,776/- has been

awarded to the respondents. The appellant seeks reduction of

the award amount.

2. The accident dated 28th February, 2004 resulted in the

death of Jatin Manocha. The deceased was aged 21 years at

the time of the accident and was survived by his parents who

filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal.

3. The deceased was a commerce graduate from Delhi

University. The deceased was self-employed and engaged in

the business of sale and purchase of automobile spare parts on

commission basis at the time of the accident. It was claimed

that the deceased was earning `7,500/- to `9,000/- per month

from his occupation. However, in the absence of any

documentary proof of income, the Claims Tribunal took the

minimum wages of `3,700/- per month, added 50% towards

future prospects, deducted 50% towards personal expenses of

the deceased and applied the multiplier of 14 to compute the

loss of dependency at `4,66,200/-. The Claims Tribunal

awarded `20,000/- towards loss of love and affection,

`1,20,576/- towards medical expenses and `5,000/- towards

funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded is

`6,11,776/-.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant has made the

following submissions at the time of hearing of this appeal:-

(i) The accident has occurred due to composite negligence

of the car bearing No.DL-6CG-8055 and truck bearing No.UP-

15P-2658 and, therefore, the recovery rights to the extent of

50% be given to the appellant against the driver, owner and

insurance company of the car.

(ii) The occupation and income of the deceased were not

proved and, therefore, the minimum wages should not have

been taken into consideration for computing the income of the

deceased.

5. The deceased was travelling in car bearing No.DL-6CG-

8055 on 28th February, 2004. The car was being driven by

Vaibhav Ahuja who appeared in the witness box as PW-1 and

deposed that he was taking a right turn on the T - point

intersection of G.T. Road and had crossed almost two-third of

the road when the truck bearing No.UP-15P-2658 driven at a

very fast speed came on the wrong lane of road and hit the

car. The FIR was registered against truck driver. The FIR, site

plan, recovery memo, inspection report of the car bearing

No.DL-6CG-8055 and truck bearing No.UP-15P-2658 were

proved as Ex.P1/10 to Ex.P1/16. The police filed a chargesheet

against the driver of the truck which was proved as Ex.P1/17.

The driver of the truck did not appear in the witness box to

rebut the evidence of PW-1. In that view of the matter, the

finding of the Claims Tribunal with respect to rash and

negligent driving of the truck does not suffer from any

infirmity.

6. With respect to the occupation and income of the

deceased, the mother of the deceased appeared in the witness

box as PW-4 and deposed that her son was a commerce

graduate from Delhi University. The copies of the secondary

school, senior secondary school and consolidated statement of

marks of B.Com. were proved as Ex.PW1/3 to Ex.PW1/5. PW-4

further deposed that her son was self-employed in the

business of automobile spare parts and used to supply spare

parts on commission basis. The deceased used to purchase

automobile spare parts from the wholesale markets at

Kashmere Gate, Karol Bagh and used to supply them to the

suppliers or dealers on commission basis. PW-4 further

deposed that the deceased was earning `7,500/- to `9,000/-

per month and his business was expanding. PW-4 further

deposed that the deceased was looking for a shop in Karol

Bagh area and his income was expected to increase to

`25,000/- to `30,000/- per month. Since there was no

documentary proof of income, the Claims Tribunal took the

minimum wages of `3,700/- into consideration and added 50%

thereon. The income of the deceased was taken to be `5,500/-

per month. Considering that the deceased was a graduate

from Delhi University and was self-employed in the business of

automobile spare parts, the income of the deceased can be

presumed to be `5,500/- per month under Section 114 of the

Indian Evidence Act without resorting to the minimum wages.

In that view of the matter, the income of `5,500/- taken by the

Claims Tribunal is just, fair and reasonable and does not

warrant any interference. The deceased was aged 21 years

and his parents were aged 44 and 49 years at the time of the

accident. The appropriate multiplier according to the age of

the mother is 14 which has been applied by the Claims

Tribunal. The loss of dependency of `4,66,200/- taken by the

Claims Tribunal is just, fair and reasonable and does not

warrant any interference.

7. The Claims Tribunal has not awarded any compensation

for loss of estate and has awarded interest @6% per annum

whereas the appropriate rate of interest should have been 9%

per annum in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in

the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association

of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy & Ors., AIR 2012 SC 100.

However, considering that there is no appearance on behalf of

the respondents and that the respondents have not filed any

cross-objections, the enhancement is not warranted.

8. For the reasons as aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. No

costs.

9. The LCR be sent back forthwith.

10. The copy of this judgment be sent to respondent Nos.1

and 2.

J.R. MIDHA, J MARCH 30, 2012 aj