Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Virender Kanwar & Ors. on 5 October, 2012
Author: J.R. Midha
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.No.547/2004
% Date of decision : 05th October, 2012
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through : Mr. L.K. Tyagi, Adv.
versus
VIRENDER KANWAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. B. Badrinath, Adv.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims
Tribunal whereby compensation of `6,80,000/- has been awarded
to claimants. The appellant seeks reduction of the award amount.
2. The accident dated 10th May, 1994 resulted in the death of
Manish Kanwar. The deceased was survived by his parents and
brother who filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal.
The deceased was aged 26 years at the time of the accident. It was
claimed that he was earning `5,000/- per month. The Claims
Tribunal took the minimum wages of `3,000/- per month, added
50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/3 rd towards his personal
expenses and applied the multiplier of 18 to compute the loss of
dependency at `6,48,000/-. `2,000/- has been awarded towards
funeral expenses and `30,000/- towards loss of love and affection.
The Claims Tribunal computed the total compensation as
`6,80,000/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of
filing of the petition till realization.
3. Vide order dated 10th December, 2004, this Court issued
notice of the appeal on the limited question as to whether correct
multiplier has been applied by the Claims Tribunal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased
was unmarried and, therefore, the multiplier should have been
applied according to the age of the parents. In the recent case of
Amrit Bhanu Shali v. National Insurance Company Ltd., 2012 (6)
SCALE 1, the Supreme Court has held that in the case of death of
an unmarried person, the multiplier has to be applied according to
the age of the deceased and not according to the age of the parents.
The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, therefore,
has no merit and is hereby rejected. It is next contended by learned
counsel for the appellant that the deceased was aged 26 years and
the appropriate multiplier according to the judgment of Sarla
Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 is 17
whereas the Claims Tribunal has applied multiplier of 18. It is
submitted that the multiplier is, therefore, liable to be reduced to
17. There is merit in this contention. Following the judgment of
the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (supra), the multiplier is
reduced from 18 to 17.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has raised
other grounds in the appeal. However, since the notice of this
appeal was issued on the limited ground as to the applicability of
the correct multiplier, the appellant is not entitled to urge the other
grounds.
6. Taking the income of the deceased as `4,500/- per month
deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenses and applying the
multiplier of 17, adding `2,000/- towards funeral expenses and
`30,000/- towards loss of love and affection, the total
compensation is computed to `6,44,000/-.
7. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is reduced from
`6,80,000/- to `6,44,000/- along with interest @ 8% per annum
from the date of the filing of the claim petition till realization.
8. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount with
the Claims Tribunal, out of which 50% amount has been released
to the claimants in terms of order dated 10 th December, 2004 and
the remaining amount is with the Claims Tribunal in fixed deposit.
The Claims Tribunal is directed to release the balance award
amount in terms of this judgment to the claimants and the
remaining amount in terms of this judgment be released to the
appellant.
9. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that respondent
No.1 Virender Kanwar has since expired on 14th July, 2012 and his
rights have devolved upon the respondent No.2 alone. Respondent
No.2 is, therefore, substituted in place of respondent No.1. The
balance award amount be released to respondent No.2 alone.
10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 further submits that
respondent No.2 is mentally unsound and is presently living in
mental asylum Raheja Hospital at Dwarka. In that view of the
matter, it would be appropriate to keep the balance award amount
in fixed deposit and the monthly interest be released to respondent
No.2 through his guardian/next friend. The respondent No.2 may
file appropriate application before the Claims Tribunal and the
Claims Tribunal shall ensure that the fixed deposit as well as the
interest amount is utilized for the benefit of respondent No.2.
11. The statutory amount deposited by the appellant be released
to the appellant.
J.R. MIDHA, J
OCTOBER 05, 2012
dk
