Delhi High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd. vs Raju Saw & Ors. on 26 September, 2013
Author: Suresh Kait
$~17
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 26th September, 2013
+ MAC.APP. 1074/2012
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.D. Singh and Mr. Navdeep Singh,
Advs.
Versus
RAJU SAW & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal and Ms. Mamta
Bhadwaj, Advs. for R1 and R2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CM. NO. 17080/2012 (For delay)
In view of the averments made in the application, the delay of 28 days
in filing the instant appeal is condoned.
The application stands disposed of.
+ MAC.APP. 1074/2012
1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated
05.05.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation as under:
"1. Loss of dependency - Rs.4,30,989/-
2. Funeral Charges - Rs. 10,000/-
3. Loss of Estate - Rs.1,00,000/-
4. Loss of Love and Affection etc. - Rs.1,00,000/-
Total - Rs.6,40,989/-"
2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that
respondents / claimants failed to prove that deceased was working anywhere
and ld. Tribunal has considered the salary of the deceased as Rs.3,683/- as
per the minimum wages for unskilled persons.
3. The second ground argued by the ld. Counsel for the appellant is that
compensation granted towards non-pecuniary heads, i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- for
loss estate and Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of love and affection are on the higher
side. Therefore, it has to be reduced.
4. Ld. Counsel further argued that the age of the deceased was 23 years
at the time of accident. He was a Bachelor and was not in a permanent job.
Therefore, ld. Tribunal ought not to have granted any compensation towards
future prospects in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs.
DTC and Ors. 2009 (6) SCC 121. However, ld. Tribunal has granted 50%
future prospects.
5. Lastly, ld. Counsel has argued that ld. Tribunal has erred in granting
Rs.50,000/- as Counsels fee and Rs.5,000/- as out of pocket expenses as
there is no such provision in the Motor Vehicles Act.
6. On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents
/ claimants submits that deceased was at the young age of 23 years. He was
unmarried. He was only the hope of his parents and ld. Tribunal has granted
a very meagre compensation of Rs.6,40,989/-.
7. He further submits that keeping in view the dictum of Rajesh & Ors.
Vs. Rajbir Singh, 2013 (6) SCALE 563, Ld. Tribunal ought to have granted
Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses, however granted only Rs.10,000/-.
He further submits that compensation granted towards loss of love and
affection and loss of Estate, i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- each is not on a higher side.
8. Ld. Counsel submits that while granting the compensation on non-
pecuniary heads, ld. Tribunal has to consider the facts and circumstances of
each and every case as there is no straight jacket formula to apply the same.
9. In the present case, respondents / claimants are old and ailing. The
deceased was the only hope of his parents. He died at the age of 23 years.
Therefore, ld. Tribunal has rightly granted compensation on the non-
pecuniary heads.
10. As the issue of future prospects is concerned, recently the Apex Court
in the case of Rajesh (Supra) has held that up to 40 years of age, 50% future
prospects should be granted. Thereafter from 40 to 50 years it should be
30% and from 50 to 60 years it should be 15%.
11. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents / claimants
submits that ld. Tribunal has rightly granted 50% future prospects keeping in
view the age of deceased as 23 years.
12. Lastly, ld. Counsel for the respondents / claimants has fairly conceded
that issue of the lawyers fee and out of pocket expenses has been decided by
this court in the case of ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kanti
Devi and Ors. (2012) ILR 6 Delhi 711, therefore, he does not press this
issue and submits that the same may be allowed in favour of the appellant.
13. Settled law is that when the claimants failed to prove the salary, Ld.
Tribunal has to consider the minimum wages applicable to the unskilled
person.
14. In the present case also respondents / claimants failed to prove the
salary of the deceased, therefore, I am of the opinion that ld. Tribunal has
rightly considered the income of the deceased as per the minimum wages for
the unskilled persons.
15. As the issue of future prospects is concerned, same has been decided
by the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh (Supra). The age of the deceased
was 23 years of age at the time of accident and ld. Tribunal has added 50%
future prospects. Therefore, I do not find any discrepancy on the issue of
future prospects.
16. As the issue of non-pecuniary heads is concerned, ld. Tribunal has
granted Rs.1,00,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and loss of
estate.
17. I have come across number of judgments of this court and the Apex
Court, including the case of Rajesh (Supra), wherein the loss of estate has
been granted as Rs.10,000/-. Therefore, keeping in view the dictum of
Rajesh (Supra) compensation towards loss of estate is reduced from
Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.10,000/-.
18. At this stage, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents /
claimants submits that ld. Tribunal and this court has to see whether the
compensation granted is just and fair. Therefore, if just and fair
compensation is not granted, this court has power to grant the same.
19. He submits that towards funeral expenses, ld. Tribunal has granted
Rs.10,000/-, whereas recently in the case of Rajesh (Supra), the Apex Court
has granted Rs.25,000/- to this head.
20. I find force in the submission of the ld. Counsel for the respondents /
claimants on the issue of just compensation. Therefore, I enhance
Rs.25,000/- from Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses. Therefore the
modified compensation comes as under:
1. Loss of dependency - Rs.4,30,989/-
2. Loss of Love and Affection - Rs.1,00,000/-
3. Loss of Estate - Rs.10,000/-
4. Funeral Expenses - Rs.25,000/-
Total Compensation - Rs.5,65,989/-
21. Hence, the reduced compensation comes to Rs.5,65,989.
22. Accordingly, instant appeal stands disposed of.
23. I note, vide order dated 28.09.2012, appellant was directed deposit
the 60% of the award amount with up-to-date interest with UCO Bank, Delhi
High Court Branch. Appellant is directed to deposit the balance
compensation amount with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the
claim petition till the deposit of the balance compensation amount with
Registrar General of this Court within five weeks from today. Failing
which, appellant would be liable for penal interest @ 12% on delayed
payment.
24. On deposit, Registrar General is directed to release the amount in
favour of the respondents / claimants in terms of the order dated 05.05.2012
passed by the ld. Tribunal.
25. Statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- be released in favour of the appellant.
CM. NO. 17079/2012 (For Stay)
With the disposal of the instant appeal itself, instant application has
become infructuous and disposed of as such.
SURESH KAIT, J
SEPTEMBER 26, 2013
Jg
