Delhi High Court
Santosh Kumar & Anr vs Prem Kumar & Ors. on 11 May, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 23rd April, 2012
Pronounced on: 11th May, 2012
+ MAC APP. 990/2011
SANTOSH KUMAR & ANR. .... Appellants
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
versus
PREM KUMAR & ORS. .... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.L.Gupta, Adv. with
Mr. Ram Ashray, Adv. for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J.
1. The Appellants who are the brother and sister of deceased
Manoj impugn a judgment dated 05.08.2011 whereby a
compensation of `1,73,400/- was awarded in favour of the
Appellants for the death of Manoj in a motor accident which
occurred on 23.12.2007.
2. During inquiry before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the
Claims Tribunal), it was claimed that the deceased was working
in a shoe factory in village Ranhola Delhi and was earning
`39,000/- per annum. The Claims Tribunal held that the
Minimum Wages of an unskilled worker at the time of the
accident were `3516/-. The Claims Tribunal relied on a report
of the Supreme Court in Gobald Motor Service Ltd. & Anr. v.
R.M.K. Veluswami & Ors., AIR 1962 SC 1; a report of the
Karnataka High Court in A. Manavalagan v. A. Krishnamurthy
& Ors., 2005 ACJ 1992; and a judgment of this Court in Keith
Rowe v. Prashant Sagar & Ors. MAC APP.601/2007 decided
on 15.01.2010 to hold that 15% of the deceased's income could
be taken as loss to estate. After making a provision towards loss
of love and affection and funeral expenses, the overall
compensation of `1,73,400/- was awarded.
3. Although, the Claims Tribunal proceeded to award a
compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (the
Act) (as is evident from the opening paragraph of the impugned
judgment), yet a perusal of the Claim Petition would reveal that
the same was filed under Section 163-A of the Act.
4. Section 163-A of the Act envisages grant of compensation to
the legal heirs or the victims as indicated in the Second
Schedule of the Act.
5. Section 163-A of the Act is extracted hereunder:-
"Section 163-A. Special provisions as to payment of
compensation on structured formula basis -
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in
any other law for the time being in force or instrument
having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or
the authorized insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of
death or permanent disablement due to accident arising
out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as
indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the
victim, as the case may be."
6. In MAC APP.304/2009 titled New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v.
Pitamber & Ors., decided on 23.01.2012 this Court noticed the
judgment of this Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited
v. Smt. Pataso & Ors., MAC APP.962/2005 decided on
01.09.2008; Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Om
Prakash & Ors., 1 (2009) ACC 148; Jagdish & Anr. v. Madhav
Raj Mishra and Anr. MAC APP.190/2011 decided on
19.04.2011; Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Anita Devi
& Ors., 2011 (5) AD (Delhi) 138, decided on 10.05.2011; and
the Supreme Court judgment in Deepal Girishbhai Soni v.
United India Insurance Company Limited, (2004) 5 SCC 385;
and opined that the compensation in a Claim Petition under
Section 163-A of the Act would be payable strictly as per the
structured formula.
7. The judgment of the Karnataka High Court in A. Manavalagan
(supra) and of this Court in Keith Rowe (supra) would not
govern the grant of compensation under Section 163-A of the
Act.
8. Thus, the compensation payable as per the structured formula
would be `4,68,000/- (39,000/- x 2/3 x 18). As per the Second
Schedule, the Appellants would be further entitled to a sum of `
2,000/- towards funeral expenses and `2,500/- towards loss to
estate.
9. Thus, the Appellants are entitled to a compensation of
`4,72,500/- as against `1,73,400/- awarded by the Claims
Tribunal.
10. The compensation thus stands enhanced by `2,99,100/- which
shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of
the Petition till the date of payment.
11. Respondent No.3 New India Assurance Company Limited is
directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest
with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, New Delhi in the name of
the Appellants within six weeks.
12. The enhanced compensation along with interest shall be payable
to the Appellants in equal proportion. 60% of the compensation
along with proportionate interest shall be held in fixed deposit
for a period of three years in UCO Bank, Delhi High Court,
New Delhi and rest of the amount along with proportionate
interest shall be released to the Appellants forthwith.
13. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
MAY 11, 2012
vk
