Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smt. Omwati & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 6755 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Date of decision: 26th November, 2012
+        MAC.APP. 298/2011

         RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD........ Appellant
                      Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.

                      versus

         SMT. OMWATI & ORS.                               ..... Respondents
                      Through:           Mr.Jitender Kumar, Adv. for R-1 to R-5.
                                         Mr. Ratnesh Rajmurti, Adv. for R-6 &
                                         R-7.
         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                                  JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of `20,35,400/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of Respondents No.1 to 5 for the death of Bhagwan Singh, who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 12.02.2010.

2. The Appellant Insurance Company does not challenge the finding on negligence. Thus, the same has attained finality.

3. From the Salary certificate Ex.PW-2/1 it was proved that the deceased was working as a Head Messenger with State Bank of India. At the time of the death he was getting a salary of `22,931.79P. The Claims Tribunal deducted a sum of `200/- per month towards income tax, one-third towards personal and living expenses to award compensation of ` 20,00,397/- towards loss of dependency. It further awarded a sum of

`10,000/- each on account of loss to estate, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection and `5,000/- towards funeral expenses to compute the overall compensation of `20,35,400/-.

4. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellant Insurance Company:-

(i) There was no clear finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal.

(ii) The deduction of income tax was on the lower side.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Claimants urges that the compensation awarded is on the lower side. Except Respondent No.2 Pawan Kumar all the children, i.e. Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 were unmarried and in the process of settling in their lives. The Claims Tribunal ought to have made deduction of one-fourth towards personal and living expenses instead of one-third made by the Claims Tribunal.

6. I have before me the Trial Court Record. The deceased's salary is proved to be `22,931/-including a sum of `275/- being paid to him as transport allowance. Thus, the Claimants were entitled to compensation on income of `22,931/- - 275/- = ` 22,656/- per month. The liability of income tax on the date of the accident, i.e. in the Assessment year 2011-12 was about `11,000/- per annum. Respondent Nos. 3,4 and 5 were aged 23 years, 20 years and 18 years respectively. The children at such young age are definitely dependent on their parents as they are still studying and in the process of settling in their life. Thus, the deductions towards personal and living expenses in this case should have been only one-fourth as against one-third made by the Claims Tribunal.

7. The loss of dependency thus comes to ` 21,52,194/- (`22,656/- x 12 -

11,000/- (income tax) x 3/4 x 11).

8. In addition, the Claimants are entitled to a sum of `25,000/- towards loss of love and affection and `10,000/- towards loss of consortium, loss to estate and funeral expenses.

9. The overall compensation comes to `22,07,194/- which in my view is just compensation.

10. Thus, the compensation computed is more than what is awarded by the Claims Tribunal. No Cross Appeal has been filed by the Claimants.

11. In the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Mamta Rani & Ors., MAC APP.629/2010, decided on 06.09.2012 this Court noticed the Supreme Court judgments in Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 274; Ibrahim v. Raju, AIR 2012 SC 534; New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Gopali & Ors., Civil Appeal No.5179 of 2012 decided on 05.07.2012 and a judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Komal & Ors., MANU/DE/2870/2012, and held that the Court can increase the compensation without filing any Cross Appeal or Cross Objections.

12. Thus, the compensation stands enhanced by ` 1,71,794/- which shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till its payment.

13. The Appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest with the Claims Tribunal within six weeks.

14. The enhanced compensation shall enure for the benefit of the First Respondent.

15. Seventy five percent of the enhanced compensation along with interest shall be held in fixed deposit in any Nationalized Bank for a period of five years. The First Respondent shall be entitled to quarterly interest on the same. Rest shall be released on deposit.

16. The statutory deposit of `25,000/- be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

17. The Appeal stands disposed of in above terms.

18. Pending Applications also stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 26, 2012 vk