Smt. Neeraj & Ors. vs Shiv Charan & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 3483 Del

$~16
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                         Date of decision:24th May 2012
+       MAC. APP. No.224/2005

        SMT. NEERAJ & ORS.                         ..... Appellants
                      Through:          Mr. Manish Maini, Advocate

                        Versus

        SHIV CHARAN & ORS.              ..... Respondents
                     Through:           None

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

                             JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of `4,75,000/-

awarded in favour of the Appellants for the death of Surender Kumar who died in an accident which occurred on 30.08.2003.

2. The ground of challenge raised by the Appellant is that although the deceased's income was proved to be `54,000/- per annum (for the purpose of grant of loss of dependency), the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) restricted it to `40,000/-. It is urged that a Public Interest Litigation WP(C)

No.749/2007 was preferred before a Division Bench of this Court. By an order dated 31.03.2008, the Writ Petition was disposed of as an assurance had been given that amendment in

the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988(the Act) was under the active consideration of the Government of India.

3. It is well settled that in a Claim Petition under Section 163-A of the Act, the compensation has to be granted strictly in accordance with the structured formula. While approaching a Claims Tribunal, a Claimant in such a Petition is not required to prove negligence against the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. This Court in MAC. APP. No.304/2009 titled New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Pitamber & Ors. decided on 23.01.2012 considered the judgments 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; and Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Anita Devi & Ors., 20011 (5) AD (Delhi) 138, decided on 10.05.2011; and relying on the judgments in Oriental Insurance Company v. Hansrajbhai V. Kodala, (2001) 5 SCC 175 and Deepal Girishbhai Soni v. United India Insurance Company Limited, (2004) 5 SCC 385 held that in a Claim Petition under Section 163-A, the compensation is to be awarded as per the structured formula.

4. It may also be noticed that no addition towards future prospects is required to be made while awarding loss of dependency in a Claim Petition under Section 163-A of the Act. In the instant case, the deceased's income was really `3,000/- per month or

`36,000/- per annum. It was only on account of addition towards future prospects that the income was assumed to be `4,500/- per month. Moreover, a total compensation of `9,500/- is permissible to be awarded under Section 163-A of

the Act as against an award of `16,000/- in this case.

5. Of course, the amendment in Section 163-A is underway. It is not known as to from which date the said amendment will have effect.

6. The compensation awarded is more than what was permissible under Section 163-A of the Act.

7. The Appeal is without any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed.

8. The pending Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MAY 24, 2012 pst