Delhi High Court
United India Insurance Company ... vs Kuldeep And Ors. on 14 March, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 14th March, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 751/2012
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate.
Versus
KULDEEP AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
MAC.APP. 751/2012
1. Vide the instant appeal, the appellant has challenged the impugned
award dated 07.05.2012 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded
compensation in favour of the respondents/claimants.
2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued only on the
ground that the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation contrary to
the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Anr. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &
Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, by considering the brothers and sisters of the
deceased as dependents.
3. Learned counsel has submitted that moreover in a case of Devi Dutt
& Others v. Manish Sharma & Others MAC App. 753/2010 decided on
19.04.2012 whereby, while relying on National Insurance Company v.
Meghji Naran Sortiya & Ors., II 2009 ACC 289 (SC), it was held that if the
claimants fail to produce any evidence of dependency, then the claim cannot
be granted in their favour being dependents.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents/claimants submitted that at the time of death the deceased was
of 19 years of age and was working as food supplier in a Dhaba and was
earning Rs.4,500/- per month. He left two brothers namely Prateek and
Kuldeep of 17 years and 26 years respectively and one sister namely Kunti
Kumari of 15 years of age.
5. He further submitted that at the time of accident, all three were
unmarried and dependent on the deceased. The sister of the deceased was
minor and just 15 years of age.
6. Learned counsel also relied upon a case of National Insurance
Company Limited v. Meghji Naran Sortiya (Supra) wherein even the
married son and daughter-in-law were also considered as dependents of the
deceased, whereas, in the present case the claimants are brothers and sisters
and their parents are pre-deceased.
7. I have heard learned counsels for the parties.
8. In India, majority of population belong to the lower strata of the
society, wherein one person is an earning member and rest all are
dependents because of unemployment. If the father and mother die, the
brother or son takes the responsibility of his brothers and sisters and he
perform all the responsibilities which were of the father. In the present case,
there are two brothers and one sister. All are unmarried and dependent, and
the sister was just 15 years of age. In such a situation, when there are no
parents on their head then one of the brothers has to take the responsibility.
It is also not necessary that the elder brother has to take the responsibility; it
depends on case to case. However, in the present case, all three brothers and
sisters were dependent upon deceased, therefore, the learned Tribunal has
rightly considered the claimants' claim and granted compensation.
9. I note that there is no suggestion put by the insurance company
whether they were working anywhere and earning, therefore, in such a
situation, the Tribunal had no option, but to rely upon the version of the
claimants. Moreover, in claim petition, they all were stated to be
dependents. The Tribunal had no option but to rely upon the averments made
in the claim petition unless and until contrary is proved by the opposite
party.
10. Similar issue has been dealt by this Court in case of Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Jai Devi Verma & Ors. being MAC App.
No.1016/2011 decided on 13th February, 2013, wherein this Court has held
as under:-
"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. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in the appeal. The
same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
12. The Registry is directed to release 25% Statutory amount deposited by
the appellant at the time of filing the appeal in its favour.
13. The Branch Manager, UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, is
directed to release the compensation amount in favour of the
claimants/respondent Nos. 1 to 3, in terms of the order dated 07.05.2012
passed by the learned Tribunal on taking necessary steps by them.
CM No. 12180/2012 (for stay)
With the disposal of the petition itself, this application has become
infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J.
MARCH 14, 2013
'raj'/RS
