Delhi High Court
Cholamandalam Ms General Ins. Co. ... vs Sudha & Ors on 16 September, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 16th September, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 662/2011
CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INS.
CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv.
Versus
SUDHA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sharma, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award
dated 13.04.2011, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for
a sum of Rs.23,93,840/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the
date of filing the petition, till the date of realization.
2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued
that ld. Tribunal has fell in error while considering the salary of the
deceased as Rs.11,500/- per month without verifying the salary
certificate.
3. Ld. Counsel further submitted that said certificate has not been
proved by the employer of the deceased as to whether the deceased
was actually drawing the said salary of Rs.11,500/- per month.
Therefore, in the absence of any evidence, ld. Tribunal ought not have
relied upon the salary certificate produced by the claimants.
4. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the ld. Tribunal has further
fell in error while granting 50% future prospects while awarding the
compensation.
5. On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents / claimants submits that the claimants produced the salary
certificate of the deceased Ex.PW1/B, however, the insurance
company did not controvert the salary certificate except by putting a
bald statement that the salary certificate was a forged document. The
insurance company has verified the said certificate through their
investigator. Same is evident from the proceedings dated 06.04.2011
before the ld. Tribunal.
6. Moreover, there was no evidence contrary to claims established
by the claimants. That apart, the Investigator of the insurance
company has admitted the fact of the salary. Therefore, in my
opinion, there was no necessity to bring any witness to prove the
same.
7. Accordingly, ld. Tribunal has rightly considered the salary of
the deceased as Rs.11,500/- per month.
8. So far as the issue of future prospects is concerned, ld. Tribunal
has relied upon a case of Shakti Devi v. New India Assurance Co.
Ltd. and Anr. decided on 09.11.2010 in Civil Appeal no. 3660/2006,
wherein the future prospects @ 50% has been added in the cases
where the age of the deceased is less than 40 years.
9. Moreover, recently in the case of Rajesh and Ors. v. Rajbir
Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) Scale 563 the Apex Court has held as under:
"Since the Court in Santosh Devi's case (Supra) actually
intended to follow the principle in the case of salaries
persons as laid in Sarla Verma's case (Supra) and to
make it applicable also to the self-employed and persons
on fixed wages, it is clarified that the increase in the case
of those groups is not 30% always; it will also have a
reference to the age. In other words, in the case of self-
employed or persons with fixed wages, in case, the
deceased victim was below 40 years, there must be an
addition of 50% to the actual income of the deceased
while computing future prospects. Needless to say that
the actual income should be income after paying the tax,
if any. Addition should be 30% in case the deceased was
in the age group of 40 to 50 years."
10. The deceased was 39 years of age at the time of accident.
Therefore, keeping in view the dictum of Rajesh & Ors. (Supra), I do
not find any discrepancy in the order passed by the ld. Tribunal on the
issue of future prospects.
11. Accordingly, instant appeal stands dismissed.
12. Consequently, balance award amount shall be released in
favour of the respondents / claimants.
13. Statutory amount be also released in favour of the appellant.
CM. No. 13419/2011
With the disposal of the appeal itself, this application has
become infructuous. The same is accordingly disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J
SEPTEMBER 16, 2013
jg
