Sapna & Ors. vs Yogender & Ors.
2015 Latest Caselaw 2981 Del

$~12
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Date of decision: 15th April, 2015
+        MAC.APP. 1154/2012

         SAPNA & ORS.                                       ..... Appellants
                            Through:     Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate
                            versus

         YOGENDER & ORS.                                   ..... Respondents
                     Through:            Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar, Advocate
                                         for Respondent no.3.
         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs.8,95,000/-

awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims

Tribunal) in favour of the Appellants for the death of Rajesh who

suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on

16.11.2010.

2. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellants that the

Appellants duly proved the deceased's income. It is stated that the

Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 and

2010-11 were duly proved, but in spite of this, the loss of dependency

was awarded on the basis of minimum wages. It is also urged that the

compensation awarded towards non-pecuniary damages is on the

lower side.

3. Per contra, the learned counsel for Respondent no.3 Insurance

Company supports the impugned judgment.

INCOME:

4. I have the Trial Court record before me. The Income Tax Returns for

the A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 for Rs.1,49,800/- and Rs.1,59,800/-

were initially produced by Smt. Guddi (PW-1), widow of deceased

Rajesh. Narender Juyal, Inspector of Income Tax also appeared as

PW-3. The witness had also brought the original record from the

Income Tax Department. A perusal of the claim petition reveals that

the Appellants had claimed that the deceased was working as a

Supervisor with M/s. S.V. Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and was earning a

monthly income of Rs.10,000/-. The record of the deceased's

employment was not produced. At the same time, the Income Tax

Returns for the A.Y. 2009-10 which was filed on 31.03.2010 and for

the A.Y. 2010-11 which was filed on 28.10.2010 were duly proved.

Nothing could be elicited in cross-examination of PW-3 which could

show that the Income Tax Returns were not genuine. Once the

Income Tax Returns were produced, the onus had shifted on the

Respondent to prove as to why the Income Tax Returns should not be

relied upon. Although the Appellants had stated the income of the

deceased to be Rs.10,000/- per month, I find no reason to disbelieve

the Income Tax Returns Ex.PW1/2 for the A.Y. 2009-10 and

Ex.PW1/1 for the A.Y. 2010-11. Since the deceased's profession was

not duly proved, the Appellants would not be entitled to any addition

towards future prospects. There were five dependents on the

deceased. On making a deduction of 1/4th towards personal and living

expenses and applying a multiplier of 16 (deceased's age being 30

years and 10 months), the loss of dependency will come to

Rs.19,17,600/-(Rs.1,59,800/- - 1/4 x 16).

5. In view of the three Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court in

Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the

Appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each towards loss of

love and affection and loss of consortium, Rs.25,000/- towards funeral

expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards loss to estate.

6. The overall compensation therefore, comes to Rs.21,52,600/-.

7. The compensation is hence, enhanced by Rs.12,57,600/- which shall

carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim

petition till its payment.

8. 10% of the enhanced compensation along with proportionate interest

shall be payable to Appellants no.2 to 6 each. Rest 50% shall enure

for Appellant no.1. The compensation awarded to Appellants no.2 to

4 shall be held in Fixed Deposit for a period till they attain the age of

18 years. The compensation awarded to Appellants no.5 to 6 shall be

released on deposit.

9. 75% of the enhanced compensation awarded to Appellant no.1 shall

be held in Fixed Deposit for a period of two, four, six and eight years

in equal proportion. Rest shall be released on deposit.

10. The enhanced compensation shall be deposited by Respondent no.3

Insurance Company with the Claims Tribunal within six weeks.

11. The appeal is allowed in above terms.

12. Pending applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE APRIL 15, 2015 pst