Friday, 24, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Lal Pari (Since Deceased) & ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 6701 Del

Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 6701 Del
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2012

Delhi High Court
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Lal Pari (Since Deceased) & ... on 22 November, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      Date of Decision: 22nd November, 2012

+      MAC. APP. 554/2005

       ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.                ..... Appellant
                    Through: Mr. Ram N.Sharma, Advocate

                     versus

       SMT. LAL PARI (SINCE DECEASED) & ORS.                  ..... Respondents
                      Through: None.

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

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant Oriental Insurance Company seeks reduction of compensation of ` 5,77,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondents No.1 and 2 for the death of Dhukam Sharma who died in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 04.08.1999.

2. It is an admitted case of the parties that on the date of death, the deceased Dhukam Sharma was survived by his widow Smt. Lal Pari and his parents who are Respondents No.1 and 2 herein. During the pendency of the Claim Petition, Smt. Lal Pari also died (a natural death).

3. The sole submission raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant is that since the dependents were only the parents, the multiplier should have been as per the age of the deceased's mother and there should have

been a deduction of 50% towards personal and living expenses as against one-third made by the Claims Tribunal.

4. I am not inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the Appellant.

Since the deceased's widow was alive on the date of the accident, she was also entitled to compensation. If she died during the pendency of the Claim Petition, the compensation payable to her would go to her legal representatives. In the instant case, the compensation had been rightly awarded in favour of Respondents No.1 and 2.

5. In this view of the matter, the Appeal is devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed.

6. Statutory deposit of ` 25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

7. Pending Applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 22, 2012 v

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter