Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. ... vs Reema Mehta & Ors.
2015 Latest Caselaw 4216 Del

$-20

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                            Decided on: 25th May, 2015
+       MAC.APP. 816/2013

        IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                                               ..... Appellant
                      Through: Mr.Harsh Vardhan, Advocate


                      versus


        REEMA MEHTA & ORS.
                                                     ..... Respondents
                               Through:   None


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

                               JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The appeal is for reduction of compensation of Rs.4,14,552/-

awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims

Tribunal) in favour of Respondent no.1 for the death of Shri

A.K. Mehta, father of Respondent no.1 who suffered fatal

injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on

14.11.2011.

2. The only ground of challenge laid by the Appellant Insurance

Company is that Respondent no.1 was an unmarried daughter

aged 30 years at the time of the accident. She got married after

a couple of months. There was no evidence that she was

financially dependent on the deceased and thus, Respondent

no.1 was only entitled to compensation towards loss to estate

and non-pecuniary damages. The Claims Tribunal erred in

awarding compensation in her favour on account of loss of

dependency.

3. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal, it was claimed that

the deceased was running a business in the name and style of

Casmo International and earning Rs.30,000/- per month.

Claimant Reema who examined herself as PW-1 did testify that

her father was running a business in the name and style of

Casmo International. She, however, could not place on record

any document with regard to the deceased's income. But, a

number of cash memos/bills Exs. PW-1/2 to PW-

1/14(collectively) were placed on record.

4. Admittedly, the deceased was not being assessed to any Income

Tax. However, in the absence of any cross-examination that the

deceased was doing business in the name and style of Casmo

International and the documents in the shape of Exs. PW-1/2 to

PW-1/14, it was established that the deceased was indeed

carrying on business in the name of Casmo International. He

used to sell Safety Posters. On a conservative basis, even I do

not accept the deceased's income to be Rs.30,000/- per month.

However, the Claims Tribunal ought not to have awarded the

compensation on the basis of minimum wages of an unskilled

worker. On a conservative estimate, I will take the income of

the deceased from the business to be Rs.10,000/- per month.

5. Since Respondent no.1 was not financially dependent upon the

deceased, she was only entitled to loss to estate. On the basis of

the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in A. Manavalagan

v. A. Krishnamurthy & Ors., 2005 ACJ 1992 and the judgment

of this Court in Keith Rowe v. Prashant Sagar & Ors., MAC

APP. No.601/2007, decided on 15.01.2001, Respondent no.1

was entitled to only 1/3rd of the deceased's future income

towards loss to estate. The deceased was aged 61 years. The

loss to estate will therefore, come to Rs.2,80,000/-(Rs.10,000/-

x 1/3 x 12 x 7).

6. In addition, Respondent no.1 would be entitled to a sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.25,000/-

towards funeral expenses.

7. The overall compensation hence, comes to Rs.4,05,000/-. Thus,

the award of Rs.4,14,552/- granted by the Claims Tribunal

cannot be said to be excessive or exorbitant.

8. The appeal therefore, has to fail; the same is accordingly

dismissed.

9. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

10. Statutory amount, if any, deposited shall be refunded to the

Appellant Insurance Company.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE MAY 25, 2015 pst