Delhi High Court
Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. vs Jai Devi Verma & Ors. on 13 February, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 13th February, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 1016/2011
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath, Advocate.
Versus
JAI DEVI VERMA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Brijesh Johar, Advocate for
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
ORDER
% 13.02.2013
MAC.APP. 1016/2011
1. The instant appeal is directed against the impugned award dated
30.07.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation as
under:-
"Medical Expenses Rs.3,030/-
Loss of financial dependency Rs.6,00,000/-
Loss of love and affection Rs.10,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 5,000/-
Loss to Estate Rs.10,000/-
Total Rs.6,28,030/-"
2. The instant appeal has been filed on the grounds inter-alia that the
learned Tribunal has passed the judgment contrary to the preposition as laid
down by the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma & Anr. Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, wherein it has been categorically
held that in case of a death of a bachelor (unmarried), 50% of the income be
deducted towards personal and living expenses whereas the learned Tribunal
has deducted 1/3rd of the income.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance
Company has submitted that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the mother and
unmarried sister of the deceased respectively. The respondent No. 1 has
stated in her evidence that her deceased son was self employed and was
doing consultancy work. He was also doing part time work with M/s
Vikrant Publicity Centre. He was a renowned Astrologer and also a gold
medallist and was earning Rs.30,000/-per month. However, she has not filed
any document regarding the same.
4. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance
Company that the claimants have also examined PW3 Shri Kamlesh
Chander Talwar, who stated that the deceased was working as a part time
employee with his firm and was getting a consolidated salary of Rs.15,000/-
per month. However, he has also not produced any record to prove the
salary.
5. The learned Tribunal has recorded in its impugned award that no
contrary evidence has been brought on record by the appellant to disapprove
the claim sought by the claimants. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has
considered the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.15,000/-per month.
6. I note that the learned Tribunal has considered the case of Sarla
Verma (supra) and observed that in the case of death of a bachelor, unless
there is evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income
and will not be considered as a dependent and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependent. In view of the above, ld. Tribunal has held that
in such a case 50% of the income will be deducted towards personal and
living expenses of the deceased.
7. Learned Tribunal has also been conscious of the fact as laid down in
the above cited case that normally 50% is to be deducted towards personal
expenses in case of a bachelor since it is assumed that a bachelor tends to
spend more on himself, even otherwise, there is also possibility of her
getting married in near future, in which case the contribution to the parents
and siblings is likely to be cut drastically.
8. Consciously, the learned Tribunal did not agree with the contention of
the appellant for the reason that it has already come on record that father of
the deceased had already pre-deceased him and he was the only son who was
looking after his widow mother and unmarried sister.
9. Ld. Tribunal has further observed that in the peculiar circumstances of
the case since there was no other earning member of the family, the
deceased was the only person who was looking after the financial and
emotional needs of the claimants.
10. In view of the above, the learned Tribunal has rightly noted in its
impugned award that in the Indian set up, a brother or son takes upon
himself responsibility of his family and looks after them, especially if,
unfortunately, the father dies leaving behind his responsibilities. Sons and
brothers take upon their shoulders not only the responsibility of taking care
of financial needs of their mothers and sisters as per Indian traditions with
few exceptions; they are also fatherly figure to their brothers and sisters in
case they loss their father.
11. It is also rightly observed and suggested that while deciding these
cases, the Judges have to be neutral, but not oblivious to their surroundings
and social setup. Therefore, there cannot be a mathematical formula in each
case to calculate compensation. Facts of each case have their peculiarity and
circumstance and since it is the duty of the Tribunal to ensure just
compensation being paid to the petitioners, orders of compensation have to
be passed in accordance with circumstances of each case.
12. Consequently, the learned Tribunal has rightly held that both the
claimants were financially dependent on the deceased and therefore, 1/3rd of
the income has been deducted towards personal expenses.
13. In view of the above discussion and legal position, I am of the view
that there is no discrepancy in the impugned award passed by the learned
Tribunal. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere therewith.
14. Finding no merit in the instant appeal, the same is dismissed with no
order as to costs.
15. Pursuant to order dated 18.11.2011, the appellant / Insurance
Company has deposited the entire awarded amount along with interest with
UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch.
16. Therefore, the Branch Manager, UCO Bank, High Court of Delhi,
New Delhi is directed to release the awarded amount in favour of the
respondents/ claimants with up-to-date interest accrued thereon in the same
terms and conditions as enumerated in the award dated 30.07.2011 passed by
the learned Tribunal.
17. Further, the Registry of this Court is directed to release statutory
amount of Rs.25,000/- in favour of the appellant/Insurance Company.
CM. No. 20786/2011 (for stay)
With the dismissal of the appeal itself, the instant application has
become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J.
FEBRUARY 13, 2013
sb/jg
