Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co Ltd. vs Geeta Devi & Ors. on 15 April, 2015
$-9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 15th April, 2015
+ MAC.APP. 620/2012
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Adv. with
Mr. Garud M.V., Adv. &
Mr. Tushar Raj, Adv.
versus
GEETA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ghanshyam Thakur, Adv. with
Mr. R.K. Jha, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The appeal is for reduction of compensation of `42,02,060/- awarded
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in
favour of Respondents no.1 to 6 for the death of Lakhan Yadav, who
suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on
05.03.2011.
2. At the time of hearing the appeal, following contentions are raised by
the learned counsel for the Appellant:-
(i) The Income Tax Return (ITR) for the Assessment Year 2008-
2009 was proved as Ex.PW-1/6 but the ITR for the Assessment
Year 2009-2010 was not proved and thus, the same ought not to
have been taken into consideration;
(ii) Deceased Lakhan Yadav was a Transporter. On his death he
left four commercial vehicles which could have been run by his
widow and children. Consequently, the loss of dependency
should not have been awarded on the entire income of the
deceased; and
(iii) There was liability of income tax on the income of `1,80,000/-.
However, no deduction towards income tax was made.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents supports the
impugned judgment.
4. I have before me the Trial Court Record.
5. ITRs for the Assessment Year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 duly
received in the Income Tax Department were proved by the widow of
the deceased. Thus, the learned counsel for the Appellant is not right
in her submission that the ITR for the Assessment Year 2009-2010
was not duly received.
6. Once these ITRs were proved and if the Appellant was not satisfied
about its genuineness, it could have engaged an investigator to make
an investigation and report about the same. However, this was not
done. Thus, I do not see any reason to disbelieve the ITRs placed on
record. The same were rightly considered by the Claims Tribunal.
7. With regard to the plea that the deceased had left four commercial
vehicles and the same could have been used by the Respondents, I
may say that the deceased Lakhan Yadav was survived by his aged
mother, a young widow aged 29 years and children aged between 1-7
years and none of them were in a position to attend the business after
his death. All the more, if the widow of the deceased would have
earned something by dent of putting her labour, that income even if
earned could not have been deducted to compute the loss of
dependency. There was liability of income tax of about `4,000/- per
annum on an income of `2,25,670/-. Thus, the fact that the deceased
owned four commercial vehicles which were inherited by the
Respondents will not affect the computation of loss of dependency.
8. Since the income of the deceased was gradually increasing and he was
in settled business of transport, the Claims Tribunal was justified in
making addition of 50% towards future prospects.
9. The loss of dependency therefore, would come to `39,90,060/-
(2,25,670/- - 4,000/- + 50% x 3/4 x 16).
10. In addition, in view of the three Judge Bench decision of the Supreme
Court in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54,
Respondents are further entitled to a sum of ` 1,00,000/- each towards
loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, `25,000/- towards
funeral expenses and `10,000/- towards loss to estate.
11. The overall compensation thus, comes to ` 42,25,060/-.
12. Hence, the award of compensation of `42,02,060/- cannot be said to
be excessive or exorbitant.
13. The appeal therefore, has to fail; the same is accordingly dismissed
with costs.
14. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
15. Statutory amount, if any, deposited shall be refunded to the Appellant
Insurance Company after deposit of costs.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
APRIL 15, 2015
vk
