United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Stephan Baroi & Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 6293 Del

$~A-39
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                       Date of decision:28.11.2014
+     MAC.APP. 1078/2014 & CM Nos.19522-19523/2014
      UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
                    Through Ms.Suman Bagga and Mr.Saral
                            Chaturvedi, Advocates

                    Versus

      STEPHAN BAROI & ORS                           ..... Respondent
                   Through

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

      JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL)

1. The facts which led to filing of the claim petition and the appeal are that on 16.5.2008 respondent No.1 was trying to board a DTC bus. The driver started the bus suddenly. In the process respondent No.1 fell down and suffered grievous injuries. Hence, the claim petition was filed.

2. The Tribunal has passed the impugned award on 13.10.2014. The issue raised pertains to the compensation awarded to respondent No.1.

3. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded the following compensation:-

      1. Towards future loss of income              Rs.2,32,927.00
     2. Towards pain and sufferings                Rs.70,000.00
     3. Towards servant/attendant                  Rs.30,000.00

4. Loss of Amenities and enjoyment of life Rs.70,000.00

5. Towards conveyance and special diet Rs.40,000.00 (without bills)

6. Towards medical bills Rs.2,15,359.00

7. Towards loss of Wages Rs.2,30,160.00

8. Total Rs.8,88,446.00

4. A perusal of the Award shows that the Tribunal noted that respondent No.1 is 53 years old and is working as a Sr.Clerk with DTC, Ghazipur Depot working as a Fitter and drawing a salary of Rs.7,672/- per month. He suffered permanent disability of 40% in relation to bilateral lower limb. The Tribunal noted that it has personally examined respondent No.1. His capacity has been considerably reduced. This is restricting him to carry on his job and in even doing his normal daily chores. He is unable to walk properly. Hence, the Tribunal keeping into account his nature of job and his employment assessed

functional disability at 20% relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar and Anr, (2011) 1 SCC 343.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that while assessing loss of income due to disability the Tribunal has after having assessed the income of respondent No.1 as Rs.7,672/- enhanced it by 15% which is contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54. She further states that as he was working with DTC, a government organisation, there is no loss of income and hence no loss due to functional disability should have been awarded. She further submits that the Tribunal has awarded loss of earning capacity for at least 30 months i.e. Rs.2,30,160/- (7672 x 30) being loss of full wages for 30 months. Hence, she further submits that this figure of Rs.2,30,160/- has to be reduced from the total compensation awarded inasmuch as there is duplication as the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.2,32,927/- for future loss of income on account of loss of income due to disability suffered assessed at 20% of the assessed income.

6. In my opinion the compensation awarded is just, fair and reasonable. The Tribunal has assessed that respondent No.1 has suffered considerably due to the disability restricting him from carrying on his job and even doing normal daily chores. This will in long run certainly have an impact on his earning. It will affect his future prospects in the DTC and subsequently after retirement also. Hence, there is no reason to disagree with the findings of the Tribunal determining functional disability at 20%.

7. On the issue of 15% enhancement on account of future prospects the Tribunal has relied upon Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir Singh & Ors. (supra) and

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company vs. Angrej Singh in MACA 846/2011 a judgment passed by this Court on 30.9.2013.

8. I see there is no reason to disagree with the said enhancement of income of 15% for future prospects.

9. On the issue of alleged duplication of compensation under the head future loss of income and loss of wages, in my opinion, there is no merit. Loss of wages is awarded on account of loss of wages for the period when the respondent No.1 could not attend his office. This is calculated on the full wages. Future loss of income is based on long term loss of earnings on account of the disability and is based on 20% functional disability as assessed by the Tribunal. This amount is for the full life of the claimant.

10. I see no merit in the contention of learned counsel for the appellant. There is no merit in the appeal.

11. Appeal is dismissed. All pending applications also stand disposed off accordingly.

12. Statutory amount deposited by the appellant at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant.

13. Appellant/insurance company shall within four weeks from today comply with the directions of the Tribunal as per the impugned Award.

JAYANT NATH, J NOVEMBER 28, 2014 N