Ramesh Chander & Anr vs Kishore Singh & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 3315 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Reserved on: 7th May, 2012
                                       Pronounced on: 17th May, 2012
+       MAC.APP. 509/2011

        RAMESH CHANDER & ANR                ..... Appellant
                    Through  Mr. N.K. Jha, Advocate

                    versus

        KISHORE SINGH & ORS                      ..... Respondent
                     Through           Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate for
                                       R-3 Insurance Company.

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

                             JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J.

1. The Appellants who are the parents of the deceased Annu Nain seek enhancement of compensation of `4,31,000/- awarded for his death in a motor accident which occurred on 23.10.2006.

2. During inquiry before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) it was claimed that the deceased was aged about 22 years, he was matriculate, was working with M/s. Sai Sanitary Emporium and was getting a salary of `6,000/- per month.

3. The Claims Tribunal believed the deceased's salary to be `6,000/- per month, deducted 50% towards personal and living

expenses, applied the multiplier of 11 as per the age of the deceased's mother and to award an overall compensation of `4,31,000/-.

4. In the absence of any Appeal by the Insured or the Insurer, I am not to go into the findings on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal.

5. Following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellants:-

(i) There should have been deduction of one-third instead of one-half made by the Claims Tribunal.

(ii) Interest should have been awarded @ 9% per annum instead of 7.5% per annum.

(iii) The deceased was a meritorious boy thus 50% addition should have been made on account of future prospects.

(iv) Some compensation should have been added on account of gratuitous services rendered by the deceased.

6. In order to prove the deceased's salary the Appellants examined PW-2 Vinod Kumar, Proprietor of M/s. Sai Sanitary Emporium. He proved the salary certificate and the vouchers Ex.PW-2/1-4 Colly, to prove that the deceased was getting a salary of `6,000/- per month. As per PW-2 the deceased had worked with them only for a period of less than four months. The minimum wages of a Matriculate at the relevant time were

`3980/- per month only. In the absence of any evidence as to the deceased's future prospects and that fact that he was in employment for a little less than four months, the Claims Tribunal was right in not making any addition on account of future prospects.

7. This accident occurred in the year 2006, the bank rate of interest on long term fixed deposits during this period were ranging between 7% to 8%. The award of interest @ 7.5% per annum in the circumstances was justified.

8. As far as deductions are concerned, it is well settled that in case of a bachelor normally deduction towards personal and living expenses would be one-half of the deceased's income. As no exceptional circumstance was pleaded or proved, deduction of 50% towards personal and living expenses was in consonance with the settled law. (Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121).

9. In the grounds of the Appeal, it has been stated that no amount of compensation has been granted towards gratuitous services rendered by the deceased. This point was not pressed during the course of hearing. Otherwise also, when the deceased is a full time employee, compensation for gratuitous services is not granted except when there is specific evidence to that effect.

10. The compensation of `3,96,000/- awarded towards loss of dependency is in consonance with law. The compensation of

`10,000/- towards loss of love and affection and `5,000/- towards funeral expenses is on the lower side. The same is enhanced to `25,000/- and `10,000/- respectively.

11. There is an enhancement of `20,000/- in the overall compensation which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till the date of its payment.

12. The enhanced amount shall enure for the benefit of Second Appellant, the deceased's mother. The same shall be released to her immediately on deposit.

13. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest within six weeks with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, New Delhi.

14. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

15. No costs.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MAY 17, 2012 vk