Delhi High Court
Sarita Gupta & Ors vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd on 9 March, 2016
$~3 & 4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 09th March, 2016
+ MAC.APP.941/2011
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .... Appellant
Through: Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath & Mr. Onkar
Nath, Advs.
versus
SARITA GUPTA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Vijay Gupta & Mr. Chetan
Swarup, Advs.
AND
+ MAC.APP.453/2012
SARITA GUPTA & ORS ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Vijay Gupta & Mr. Chetan
Swarup, Advs.
versus
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath & Mr. Onkar
Nath, Advs
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL):
1. Ankur Gupta, aged 24 years, then a bachelor who had attained the
degree of Master of Computer Applications after graduation (B.Com) and
having undertaken the course of Intermediate CA, then serving with Sapient
Corporation Pvt. Ltd. at a consolidated salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month died
on account of injuries suffered in a motor vehicular accident that occurred
on 08.08.2004 at about 04:30 am, involving a truck bearing No. HR 47L
9013 which was admittedly insured against third party risk with Oriental
Insurance Company Ltd., the appellant (the insurer) in MAC Appeal
No.941/2011.
2. The parents of the deceased (claimants) brought a claim petition
under Sections 166 and 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) before
the motor accident claims tribunal (the tribunal) on 03.02.2005 which was
registered as MACT Case No. 14/2011. They (first and second respondents
in MAC Appeal No. 941/2011 and the appellants in connected appeal MAC
Appeal No. 453/2012) impleaded the insurer as party respondent in addition
to the driver and owner of the truck. The insurer admitted the liability to
indemnify under the third party insurance policy for the period in question,
there being no case made out regarding breach of terms and conditions
thereof.
3. The tribunal awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 17,30,000/-
with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till
realization. The compensation thus granted included Rs. 17,16,000/-
towards loss of dependency and Rs.7,000/- each on account of loss of estate
and funeral expenses. The loss of dependency was worked out by adopting
the consolidated salary of Rs. 15,000/-, adding the element of future
prospects of increase and applying the multiplier of 13, after deduction of
50% towards personal & living expenses.
4. The insurance company has come up in appeal questioning the above
said computation raising objection to the element of future prospects having
been added. Per contra, the claimants filed cross objections which has been
registered as an independent appeal being MAC Appeal No. 453/2012, their
contention mainly being that the evidence adduced during inquiry showed
that the deceased had a brilliant academic record and though his initial
engagement as an associate trainee by the aforementioned company was
against a stipend of Rs.15,000/- per month on probation for a period of six
months, given the extraordinary qualifications that he held, his career would
have blossomed and that after his confirmation, on basis of his performance,
he could have got a salary in the range of Rs. 6,04,400/- to Rs.6,75,000/- per
annum. The contention of the claimants is that it is the said prospective
salary which should have been considered for calculating the loss of
dependency. Their further grievance is that the award under the non-
pecuniary heads of damages is deficient, also as no award has been made on
account of loss of love & affection.
5. Having heard arguments and gone through the tribunal's record, this
Court does not find any substance in the contention of the insurance
company against the element of future prospects being considered by the
tribunal. At the same time, the contention of the claimants that the future
expected income of the deceased should have been the basis of the
calculation for loss of dependency cannot be accepted.
6. Though Praveen Kumar Gupta (PW-1), the father (claimant) of the
deceased and Naveen Sanghvi (PW-3) an employee deputed by the
employer company to prove the relevant facts concerning his engagement
with the said entity, did depose about the possible rise in the career for the
deceased, the averments and statements to the effect that his income would
have risen to the extent of ` 6,04,400/- to ` 6,75,000/- per annum is in the
realm of speculation. The fact remains that at the time of his death his
income was `15,000/- per month. Given the nature of employment which
he had secured on the basis of his aforementioned educational qualifications,
however, there can be no doubt about the fact that his career would have
seen progressive rise. In these circumstances, the method of factoring in the
element of future prospects as commended by the Supreme Court in Sarla
Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC
121, was correctly adopted by the tribunal to assess the notional income of
the deceased to work out the loss of dependency at ` 11,000/- per month.
7. There is, however, substance in the grievance of the claimants that the
award under the non-pecuniary heads of damages is highly deficient.
Following the view taken by the Supreme Court in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir
Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma
(2015) 9 SCC 150, the award of ` 1 lakh on account of loss of love &
affection and `25,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses
deserves to be granted in place of meager total amount of ` 14,000/- towards
loss of estate and funeral expenses.
8. Thus, the award is modified with an amount of ` 1,36,000/- having
been added, raising the compensation to ` 18,66,000/-,
9. Indeed, there is no reason why the claimants should have been denied
the rate of interest at 9% per annum as is ordinarily granted. [see judgment
dated 22.02.2016 in MAC.APP. 165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v.
Sangeeta Devi & Ors.] Accordingly, the rate of interest is increased to 9%
per annum from the date of filing of the petition.
10. By order dated 24.10.2011 in MAC Appeal No. 941/2011, the insurer
had been directed to deposit 50% of the awarded compensation with the
Registrar General and the balance 50% with the tribunal. The amount
deposited with the tribunal was directed to be released to the claimants.
11. It is directed that 50% of the awarded amount as deposited with the
Registrar General shall also be released forthwith to the claimants in terms
of the impugned judgment along with proportionate interest. The insurer
shall be liable to pay further amount inasmuch the award has been increased.
It is directed to deposit the balance of the amount, thus payable to the
claimants with upto date interest by depositing it with the tribunal 30 days of
this order whereupon it shall be released to the claimants.
12. The statutory deposit, if made by the insurer, shall be refunded.
13. Both these appeals stand disposed of in above terms.
R.K. GAUBA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 09, 2016
nk
