Delhi High Court
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co ... vs Smt Vinod & Ors on 31 May, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 31st May, 2012
+ MAC.APP. 234/2012
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.. Appellant
Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman,
Advocate
versus
SMT VINOD & ORS ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal Advocate
Ms. Suman. N. Rawat, Adv.
+ MAC.APP. 507/2012
VINOD & ORS ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal with
Ms. Suman. N. Rawat, Adv.
versus
BABAR BHAN & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman,
Advocate for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. These two Cross-Appeals arise out of a judgment dated
01.12.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the
Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `64,48,952/- was
awarded for the death of Satpal Singh Dagar, who died in a
motor accident which occurred on 06.08.2010.
2. Both the parties urge that the computation of compensation has
to be in accordance with the principles laid down in Sarla
Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6
SCC 121, which should have been correctly applied.
3. The Appellant IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company
Limited urges that the deceased was more than 45 years so the
appropriate multiplier should be '13' and that the compensation
awarded towards the loss of love and affection amounting to
`1,25,000/- is on the higher side.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Appellants in MAC
APP.507/2012 (the Claimants) urges that the calculation
towards payment of tax was not correctly carried out. The
liability towards payment of tax was straightaway taken as 20%
in respect of the whole income without giving any benefit
towards the non taxable income.
5. It was established on record that the deceased was getting a
salary of `48,110/- including the amount of `4640/- towards
transport allowance and `7454/- towards the House Rent
Allowance. The Transport Allowance being personal and
incidental to the employment was not for the benefit of the legal
representatives, the same has to be excluded to compute the loss
of dependency. The House Rent Allowance was of course for
the benefit of the deceased and the members of his family. The
same was liable to be excluded while computing the income tax
payable on the income.
6. Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation &
Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 discussed the previous report of the
Supreme Court in Sarla Dixit v. Balwant Yadav, (1996) 3 SCC
179; General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport
Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs.) and Ors.
(1994) 2 SCC 176; U.P. SRTC v. Trilok Chandara, (1996) 4
SCC 362; and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Charlie, (2005)
10 SCC 720, and laid down the multiplier applicable at various
age groups. The same can be extracted in a tabulated form
hereunder:-
"I. MULTIPLIER
Age of the Multiplier
deceased (in
years)
7. It may be noticed that the multiplier has been given from the
ages of 15-20, 21-25, 26-30 and so on. Thus, there is a
technical flaw as to the multiplier between the ages of 20-21,
25-26, 30-31 and so on. To apply the judgment purposefully,
the multiplier has to be taken as per the age which is nearer to
the birth on the date of the accident.
8. Since the age of 45 is nearer to the birthday (he being 45 years
and 3 months on the date of the accident), the age of 45 years
shall be taken for computation of loss of dependency. Thus, the
appropriate multiplier would be '14' and not '13'. The loss of
dependency following Sarla Verma (supra) comes to
`67,76,098/- (43,470/- x 12 - 25,222 (income tax) +30% x 3/4 x
14).
9. The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of `1,25,000/- towards loss
of love and affection. 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 from ` 1,25,000/- to ` 25,000/- only.
10. The Claimants are further entitled to a sum of `10,000/- each
towards loss of consortium, loss to estate and funeral expenses
as awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
11. The overall compensation thus comes to `68,31,098/-
(67,76,098/- + 55,000/-).
12. There is an enhancement of `3,82,146/- in the amount of
compensation awarded, which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the Petition till the date of
deposit. The enhanced compensation shall enure for the benefit
of the First Claimant.
13. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited is directed
to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest within eight
weeks in UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, New Delhi in the name
of Smt. Vinod, the First Appellant.
14. 80% of the enhanced compensation shall be held in fixed
deposit for a period of two years, four years, six years and eight
years. Rest of the amount shall be released to her on deposit.
15. The statutory amount of `25,000/- shall be refunded to the
Insurance Company.
16. Both the Appeals are allowed in above terms.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
MAY 31, 2012
vk
