Delhi High Court
Tata Aig General Insurance Co Ltd vs Sh Dipanjan Ghosh & Ors on 2 March, 2016
Author: R. K. Gauba
$~16
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 2nd March, 2016
+ MAC.APP. 44/2014
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman and Mr.
Arbaaz Hussain, Advs.
versus
SH DIPANJAN GHOSH & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Adv. for R-
1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL):
1. On the petition brought by the first respondent under Section 166 and
140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act), registered as suit No.313/2012,
the Tribunal granted compensation in the sum of Rs.48,20,420/- (increased
to ₹49,20,420/- vide order dated 13.01.2014) with interest at 9% per annum
from the date of filing of the petition (03.07.2012) till realization in his
favour calling upon the appellant insurance company to pay in terms of third
party insurance taken out in respect of offending vehicle Santro car bearing
No.DL 3CBQ 2681. The compensation, thus awarded, includes
Rs.39,60,000/- on account of potential/future income, it having been
calculated on the basis of the existing income of the claimant (Rs.55,000/-
per month) on the multiplier of 15 (having regard to his age of more than 55
years), on the basis of 40% of functional disability suffered due to
amputation of left lower limb.
2. The insurance company has come up in appeal pointing out that the
above calculation of loss of future earnings was wrong in that the claimant
has continued to be in the employ of Tek Mahindra Ltd. in the position of
senior technical associate and, thus, there has been no loss of earnings which
fact was noted while denying any compensation towards loss of income.
3. Per contra, the counsel for the claimant argued that the assessment of
the Tribunal is correct and there is no cause for interference.
4. In the face of the fact that there is no loss of employment and the
claimant has continued to be in service, there is substance in the contention
raised by the insurance company. But it cannot be forgotten that there
would be loss of future earnings arising out of the disability suffered, once
the claimant retires. Ordinarily, the employees even in private service are
superannuated at the age of 60 years. In these circumstances, the loss of
future earnings due to disability requires to be recalculated on the multiplier
of 9.
5. Having regard to the fact that there is bound to be increase in the
income over the period the claimant continues to serve in the present
employment, the element of future prospects would have to be added. Since
the loss of future earning capacity is to be computed with reference to the
income that would be available at the time of superannuation, the current
income is increased by 30% and, thus, the notional income on which future
earning capacity may be assessed is calculated as (55,000 x 130 ÷ 100)
₹71,500/- per month. The loss of earnings at 40% disability comes to
(71,500 x 40 ÷ 100) ₹28,600/-. On the multiplier of 9, the total loss of future
earnings comes to (28,600 x 12 x 9) ₹30,88,800/- rounded off to
₹30,90,000/-. Since the Tribunal calculated this portion of the compensation
at ₹39,60,000/-, the total compensation ordered to be paid has to be reduced
by (39,60,000 - 30,90,000) ₹8,70,000/-. In this view, the compensation is
reduced to (49,20,420 - 8,70,000) ₹40,50,420/- rounded off to ₹40,51,000/.
It shall carry interest at 9% per annum as directed by the Tribunal.
6. The Tribunal had directed ₹43 lakhs to be put in fixed deposit receipts
in the name of the claimant releasing the balance for his immediate needs.
By order dated 17.01.2014, the insurance company had been directed to
deposit 80% of the awarded amount with up-to-date interest with Registrar
General and, from out of the said deposit, 40% was allowed to be released to
the claimant in terms of the impugned judgment, the balance having been
kept in fixed deposit receipt with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court branch, New
Delhi for a period of six months to be renewed periodically. Since the
amount of compensation has been reduced, it is directed that the entire
balance now payable shall be put in fixed deposit receipt in the name of the
claimant for a period of six years with liberty to draw monthly interest. The
Registrar General shall arrange for the balance payment to be released to the
claimant in terms of the order modified as above refunding the balance, if
deposited in excess, to the insurance company along with statutory deposit,
if any.
7. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K. GAUBA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 02, 2016/VLD
