Delhi High Court
Icici Lombard General Ins. Co. ... vs Archana Sethi & Ors. on 30 October, 2012
Author: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 30th October, 2012
+ MAC.APP. 797/2012
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INS. CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Rajat Brar, Adv.
versus
ARCHANA SETHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kundan Kumar, Adv. for R-1 & R-2.
+ MAC.APP. 848/2012
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INS. CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Rajat Brar, Adv.
versus
SMT. VINITA SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Kundan Kumar, Adv. for R-1 & R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. These two Appeals (MAC APP.797/2012 and MAC APP.848/2012) arise
out of two separate judgments dated 04.02.2012 passed in Suit
No.232/2011 and Suit No.202/2011 whereby a compensation of
`26,32,000/- (in Suit No.232/2011) and a compensation of `28,31,000/-
(in Suit No.202/2011) was awarded in favour of Respondents No.1 and 2
who are the parents of the deceased Shaurya Sethi and Kislay Kinshuk
respectively.
2. Both the deceased were first year Engineering students in a prestigious
Institution, that is, Delhi College of Engineering (which later on became
Delhi Technological University). Both of them suffered fatal injuries in a
motor vehicle accident which occurred on 29.03.2011.
3. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance
Company. I am, therefore, not required to go into the same.
4. The Claims Tribunal while assessing the deceased's income referred to
the testimony of PW-2 Neeraj Nimwal, Training and Placement Officer,
Delhi Technological University who deposed that for the last two years
there were 100% placements given to the students. Some of the students
got multiple offers. He deposed that last year the maximum offer for a
student of 7th Semester was `40 lacs per annum and the minimum was
`3.5 lacs per annum. He deposed that all the big companies like
Microsoft, IOCL, Morgan Stanley, GAIL, Maruti etc. and various
overseas companies come to their campus for campus placement. The
Claims Tribunal referred to the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court
in B.Ramulamma & Ors. v. Venkatesh Bus Union & Anr. 2011 ACJ 1702
where it was held that the parents of the children pursuing professional
course, i.e. B. Tech. or M. Tech. were spending a sum of `70,000/- to ` 1
lacs per annum towards payment of fee and hostel charges etc. Andhra
Pradesh High Court held that it would be reasonable to accept the salary
of an Engineering Graduate in the Govt. to award compensation. The
Andhra Pradesh High Court further held that there could be deduction of
10% per year in respect of the students studying in second or third year as
the case may be. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, took the potential
salary of an Engineer to be `50,000/- per month, deducted 30%, i.e. 10%
each per year on the basis of the judgment in B. Ramulamma, deducted
50% towards personal and living expenses, further deducted `22,000/-
towards income tax (as per Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport
Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121), applied the multiplier as per the
age of the deceased's mother to compute the loss of dependency. The
Claims Tribunal further awarded notional sum of ` 25,000/- towards loss
of love and affection and `10,000/- each towards loss to estate and
funeral expenses.
5. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the compensation
awarded is excessive and exorbitant as the deceased Shaurya Sethi and
Kislay Kinshuk were students of B.Tech. first year. The award of
compensation on assuming an income of Rs.35,000/- was very excessive
as this was only the potential income of the deceased. It is stated that
even potential income taken was on the higher side.
6. It is no longer res integra that the potential income of a student pursuing
professional course can be taken into account for awarding loss of
dependency.
7. In Ganga Devi & Ors. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., MAC
APP. 359/2008, decided by this Court on 23.11.2009, which related to the
death of a student (studying medicine) who was doing internship and was
to be awarded the MBBS degree in a short time, the Tribunal awarded a
compensation of ` 9,35,352/- on the basis of the minimum wages of a
Graduate. This Court observed that although the deceased was getting a
stipend of ` 5,000/- per month at the time of his death due to the accident,
he would have ultimately joined as a doctor at a salary ranging between `
16,000/- per month to ` 25,000/- per month. Thus, the average monthly
income of the deceased was taken as ` 18,000/- and after adding 50%
towards future prospects, the compensation was enhanced to `21,36,000/-
8. In Ramesh Chand Joshi v. New India Assurance Company MAC
APP.212-213/2006 decided on 20.01.2010 this Court took the potential
income of a BE (Bio-Technology) First year student of Delhi College of
Engineer (DCE) `38,333/- per month.
9. I have before me the scale of pay of Group A employee in the Central
Govt. which is applicable in the case of Engineers. The gross salary on
such scale w.e.f. January, 2011 was `42,842/-. Moreover, the testimony
of PW-2 Neeraj Nimwal that various packages ranging between 3.5 lacs
to `40 lacs were offered to the various students of the 7 th Semester was
not challenged in cross-examination. Thus, the assumed income of
`50,000/- per month and then the deduction of `5,000/- per year, i.e.
`15,000/- as the deceased were only in the first year was in consonance
with the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in B.Ramulamma. It
has to be borne in mind that Delhi College of Engineering which later on
became Delhi Technological University is one of the most prestigious
Engineering Colleges in the country. The award of compensation on
assumed income of `35,000/- per month of an Engineering student of
such an institution cannot be said to be exorbitant or excessive.
10. The Appeals are devoid of any merit; the same are accordingly dismissed.
11. The amount of compensation deposited shall be released/held in fixed
deposit in terms of the order passed by the Claims Tribunal.
12. Deficiency, if any, in the Court fees shall be made up within four weeks.
13. The statutory deposit of `25,000/- be refunded to the Appellant Insurance
Company.
14. Pending Applications also stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 30, 2012
vk
