Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Jyoti Malhotra & Ors.
2015 Latest Caselaw 113 Del

Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 113 Del
Judgement Date : 8 January, 2015

Delhi High Court
Icici Lombard General Insurance ... vs Jyoti Malhotra & Ors. on 8 January, 2015
Author: G.P. Mittal
$~18

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Date of decision: 08th January, 2015

+        MAC. APP. No.631/2013

         ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                                                                  ..... Appellant
                             Through:      Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate & Mr.
                                           Pankaj Gupta, Advocate


                        Versus


         JYOTI MALHOTRA & ORS.                       .....Respondents
                      Through: Mr. Puneet Khurana, Advocate for
                               Respondents no.1 & 2.


         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                                 JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 04.01.2013 passed by

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby

compensation of Rs.17,17,146/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum

was awarded in favour of Respondents no.1 and 2 for the death of Karan

Malhotra, their unmarried son.

2. The only ground raised by the Appellat at the time of arguments is that

the monthly salary of the deceased was wrongly taken as Rs.13,271/-

instead of Rs.11,271/-. It is urged that reimbursement of Rs.2,000/- was

wrongly added in the monthly salary of the deceased of September, 2009

and thus, the deceased's salary without this addition even for the month

of September, 2009 was only Rs.11,271/-.

3. I have perused the pay slips placed on record of the Claims Tribunal as

well as on the paper book which clearly depict that the deceased's salary

in the month of June, July and August, 2009 was Rs.11,271/- only.

However, in the month of September, 2009, it was Rs.13,271/- as there

was an addition of Rs.2,000/- towards reimbursement.

4. The learned counsel for Respondents no.1 and 2 opposes the appeal and

submits that there was an enhancement of Rs.2,000/- in the salary in

September, 2009. I am not inclined to agree with the learned counsel for

Respondents no.1 and 2 in view of the documents in the shape of salary

slips which clearly demonstrate that the amount of Rs.2,000/- was

towards reimbursement only. Thus, the loss of dependency is computed

as Rs.14,20,146/- (Rs.11,271/- + 50% x ½ x 12 x 14).

5. At the same time, it is urged by the learned counsel for Respondents that

a sum of only Rs.25,00/- was awarded towards loss of love and affection.

With the inflation, now the trend is to award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

towards loss of love and affection. If any authority is needed, reference

may be made to Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors.,(2013) 9 SCC 54.

Consequently, the compensation towards loss of love and affection is

raised from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. Similarly, the compensation

towards funeral expenses is raised from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.25,000/-.

6. The overall compensation is re-computed as under:

          S.No. Head                      of Granted by Granted by
                Compensation                 the    Claims this Court
                                             Tribunal

1. Loss of Dependency Rs.16,72,146/- Rs.14,20,146

2. Loss of Love and Rs.25,000/- Rs.1,00,000/-

Affection

3. Funeral Expenses Rs.10,000/- Rs.25,000/-

4. Loss to Estate Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/-

                        Total               Rs.17,17,146/- Rs.15,55,146/-
                                                           R




7. The overall compensation is thus, reduced from Rs.17,17,146/- to Rs.15,55,146/-.

8. By order dated 19.07.2013, entire amount of `17,17146 was ordered to be deposited by the Appellant in the Court and 80% of the same was ordered to be released in favour of Respondents no.1 and 2.

9. Thus the excess sum of Rs.1,62,000/- along with proportionate interest as granted by the Claims Tribunal and the interest accrued, if any, during

the pendency of the Appeal will be refunded to the Appellant ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. by the Court.

10. The remaining amount of compensation along with interest shall be distributed in equal proportion to the Claimants/held in Fixed Deposit as directed by the Claims Tribunal.

11. The finding of the Claims Tribunal with regard to return of sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the owner as given in para 30 of the impugned judgment is also affirmed.

12. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- shall also be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

13. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.

14. Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JANUARY 08, 2015 pst

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter