Delhi High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd. vs Saroj Devi & Ors. on 11 March, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 11th March, 2014
+ MAC.APP. 1088/2012 & CM No.17347/2012
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Represented by: Mr.Sameer Nandwani,
Advocate.
Versus
SAROJ DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Narender Mukhi, Advocate
for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
MAC.APP. 1088/2012
1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award
dated 21.07.2012, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation
as under:-
"Pecuniary damages (Special damages):
a) Medical expenses---------------------- Rs.1,34,641/-
b) Loss of income------------------------- Rs. 44,800/-
c) Special diet expenses------------------ Rs. 25,000/-
d) Conveyance charges--------------------- Rs. 25,000/-
Non-pecuniary damages (General damages)
e) Pain, suffering, mental shock and
trauma----- Rs.1,50,000/-
____________
Total Rs. 3,79,441/-
____________"
Interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the
claim petition till realization of the amount was also awarded by the learned
Tribunal.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the
learned Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.44,800/- for loss of income
and Rs.25,000/- each towards special diet expenses and conveyance charges,
which is on higher side.
3. He further submits that compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- granted on
account of pain, suffering, mental shock and trauma is also on a higher side
and interest at the rate of 12% per annum awarded on the compensation
amount is exorbitant and without any basis.
4. Perusal of the record reveals that at the time of the accident, the
injured was getting pension of Rs.3,600/-, being ex-serviceman and used to
earn Rs.7,600/- per month, being employed with MTNL Tower. To prove
the salary, salary certificate Ex.PW1/3 issued by the employer of the injured
is on record.
5. PW3 Harvir Singh Dhoon, Field Officer, has proved the salary
certificate of the injured as Ex.PW3/A. During cross-examination, he stated
that he brought the attendance register and leave record of the injured.
6. It is an admitted fact that the injured had not suffered any disability;
however, his medical record shows that he had suffered multiple fractures in
right leg. The accident had taken place on 15.09.2007 and he got the
treatment from M. B. Hospital and was discharged on 13.10.2007. The
learned Tribunal has opined that in normal circumstances, ordinary fractures
are cured within a maximum period of three-four months. Accordingly, the
claimants are entitled for loss of income to the tune of Rs. 44,800/-
(Rs.11,200 x 4).
7. Though the claimants have failed to prove any amount being spent on
the conveyance and special diet, keeping in view the sickness and the serious
injuries, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/-each towards
special diet and conveyance charges.
8. So far as the issue of awarding compensation for pain, suffering,
mental shock and trauma is concerned, the learned Tribunal has recorded
that the injured had suffered certain fractures, due to which he could not
walk properly. He had faced difficulty and inconvenience while performing
the daily personal routine acts at least for the period of two-three months. He
must have suffered great pain and sufferings and also had undergone some
shock of accident. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal awarded lump sum
amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and sufferings, inconvenience, mental
shock, temporary loss of amenities etc. while relying upon the judgment of
Govind Yadav Vs. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Civil
Appeal No. 9014 of 2011 decided on 01.11.2011.
9. Besides compensation, the learned Tribunal has awarded interest at
the rate of 12% per annum as per the judgment in case titled 'State Bank of
Madhya Pradesh Vs. Diwan Chandra Gupta', reported in 1989 ACJ 320.
As pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant, in the year 1989,
rate of interest on the FDRs was on a higher side, therefore, interest at the
rate of 12% per annum could be granted in that year. However, ratio of the
case cited above cannot be applied in the present case.
10. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the instant
appeal except the interest @ 12% per annum awarded by the learned
Tribunal is on a higher side. Hence, following the principles of justice,
equity and good conscience and that it being a social welfare legislation, I
reduce the rate of interest to 9% per annum.
11. Vide order dated 11.10.2012, while granting stay, this Court directed
the appellant/Insurance Company to deposit 50% of the award amount with
interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
12. Therefore, the appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
balance 50% amount with up-to-date interest accrued thereon at the rate of
9% per annum with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of six
weeks from today.
13. On deposit, the Registrar General shall release the said amount in
favour of the respondents/claimants in terms of the order dated 21.07.2012
passed by the learned Tribunal.
14. The statutory amount shall be released in favour of the
appellant/Insurance Company thereafter.
15. In view of the above, the appeal is partially allowed.
CM No.17347/2012 (for stay)
With the disposal of the appeal itself, this application has become
infructuous. The same is accordingly dismissed.
SURESH KAIT, J.
MARCH 11, 2014/sb/jg
