Delhi High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd. vs Mamta & Ors on 22 August, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 22nd August, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 445/2011
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. K.L. Nandwani, Adv.
versus
MAMTA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv. for R1 to R6.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Instant appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the award dated 04.01.2011, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.9,66,328/- with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.
2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that the instant appeal has been filed mainly on the ground that on 03.05.2009 one Afsar Anwar was repairing a Road Roller near Geeta Colony Flyover on the Pusta Road, Pantool Pul, Delhi when Tractor bearing No. UP95A3135, i.e., the offending vehicle with its water tanker was reversed by respondent no. 5 at a high speed and due to this three persons including Sh. Rajender Singh, husband of respondent no. 1 died and other received grievous injuries.
3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tractor was being used for commercial purpose and water tanker was not insured. Moreover, the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid driving licence and both the drivers, i.e., driver of Road Roller and the driver of the Tractor were negligent. Therefore it is a case of res ipta loquitor. However, ld. Tribunal has decided the case against the offending vehicle.
4. Ld. Counsel submitted that the ld. Tribunal has considered minimum wages for skilled person as Rs.4,358/-, since the deceased was not in a permanent job, therefore, future prospects of 50% considered by the ld. Tribunal should not have been granted.
5. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further submitted that respondent no. 5 was not possessing a valid driving licence and was charged under Section 5/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act and as per their investigator, the offending vehicle was being driven by a person, who was not having a valid driving licence. Notice for production of the driving licence was also issued, but neither the driving licence was produced nor any reply to the notice was sent.
6. On the issues raised by the appellant, ld. Tribunal has recorded that as per the accident report, respondent no. 5, who is the driver of the offending vehicle, had not produced any driving licence before the IO, but during trial he produced the photocopies of his driving licence. Copy of the same was handed over to the ld. Counsel for the appellant on 28.08.2010. The appellant did not lead any evidence to prove that the driving licence of the respondent no. 5 was fake. Therefore, ld. Tribunal has rightly not granted any recovery rights in favour of the appellant.
7. So far as the future prospects are concerned, the age of the deceased was 34 years at the time of accident and in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh and Ors. v. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) Scale 563, I am of the considered opinion that ld. Tribunal has rightly granted future prospects as 50%.
8. At this stage, ld. Counsel for the respondents / claimants submitted that for just and fair compensation, this Court can consider other issues that on the non-pecuniary heads, ld. Tribunal has failed to grant any compensation, i.e., on account of loss of love and affection. He further submits that compensation for loss of consortium and towards funeral expenses were also on a very lower side. To strengthen his arguments, he has relied upon the case of Rajesh & Ors. (supra).
9. In view of the settled legal position, I find force in the submission of ld. Counsel for the respondents/claimants.
10. In view of the above, I grant Rs.1,00,000/- towards love and affection and enhance Rs.1,00,000/- from Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- from Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses.
11. Accordingly, appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with the Registrar General of this Court within five weeks from today. The enhanced amount shall also carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the appeal till its realization. The respondent / claimant shall be entitled for 12% in case of delayed payment.
13. On deposit, the Registrar General of this Court is directed to release the enhanced amount in favour of the respondents / claimants.
14. The Registry of this Court is directed to release the statutory amount in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company on receipt of the enhanced amount.
CM. NO. 9808/2011
In view of the above, instant application has become infructuous and disposed of as such.
SURESH KAIT, J
AUGUST 22, 2013
jg
