Delhi High Court
Reliance Gen. Ins Co. Ltd. vs Sh. Tapan Roy & Ors. on 27 January, 2015
Author: G.P. Mittal
$-18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 27th January, 2015
+ MAC.APP. 1080/2013
RELIANCE GEN. INS CO. LTD.
..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman,
Advocate with Mr. Garud M.V.,
Advocate
versus
SH. TAPAN ROY & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava,
Advocate for Respondent no.1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
JUDGMENT
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The Appellant impugns judgment dated 17.08.2013 passed by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal)
whereby compensation of Rs.16,12,000/- was awarded in
favour of Respondent no.1(injured) for having suffered injuries
in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 17.06.2012
which resulted in the amputation of Respondent no.1's right
hand below elbow.
2. Referring to Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343, the
learned counsel for the Appellant submits that since the
Appellant was granted compensation of loss of earning capacity
to the extent of 84% amounting to Rs.10,75,000/-, Respondent
no.1 ought not to have been awarded Rs.1,50,000/- each
towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities and loss of
expectation of life and disfigurement. Para 15 of the Raj
Kumar(supra), is extracted hereunder:
"15. It may be noted that when compensation is
awarded by treating the loss of future earning
capacity as 100% (or even anything more than 50%),
the need to award compensation separately under the
head of loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life
may disappear and as a result, only a token or
nominal amount may have to be awarded under the
head of loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life,
as otherwise there may be a duplication in the award
of compensation. Be that as it may."
3. Admittedly, in the instant case, loss of earning capacity to the
extent of 84% was granted by the Claims Tribunal. In Raj
Kumar(supra), the Supreme Court only referred to the
compensation towards loss of amenities and expectation of life.
So, the amount of compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- each towards
pain and suffering and disfigurement cannot be faulted.
However, the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of
amenities of life is reduced to from Rs.1,50,000/- to Rs.25,000/-
.
4. The overall compensation is reduced by Rs.1,25,000/- which
comes to Rs.14,87,000/-.
5. Since the entire compensation was deposited in this Court in
pursuance of order dated 26.11.2013, the excess amount of
Rs.1,25,000/- along with proportionate interest shall be released
to the Appellant Insurance Company.
6. Rest of the compensation shall be disbursed/held in Fixed
Deposit in terms of the orders passed by the Claims Tribunal.
7. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
8. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
9. Statutory amount of Rs.25,000/-, if any, shall also be refunded
to the Appellant Insurance Company.
(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
JANUARY 27, 2015
pst
