Delhi High Court
Gurinder Singh & Anr. vs Ashok Kumar & Ors. on 28 March, 2016
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 28th March, 2016
+ MAC.APP. 323/2009
GURINDER SINGH & ANR.
..... Appellant
Through Mr. J C Mahindroo, Adv.
versus
ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.
..... Respondent
Through Mr. Manoj R Sinha, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL):
1. Banmeet Singh, a bachelor, died as a result of injuries suffered in
motor vehicular accident that occurred on 12.08.2005 involving a
motorcycle bearing registration No.DL 45Z 9923 (the motorcycle) on which
he was riding pillion and a bus bearing registration No.DL 1P 8346 (the
offending vehicle). After the accident, he was rushed to hospital where he
remained in critical state till he succumbed to injuries on 06.09.2005. His
parents (appellants) brought an accident claim case under Sections 166 and
140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) (petition No.191/2006) on
27.09.2005 impleading the driver, owner and insurer of the offending
vehicle as party respondents. The tribunal by judgment dated 07.03.2009
awarded compensation in the sum of `11,05,695/- with interest at 7% per
annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization apportioning it in
equal shares amongst the father and mother. While directing the insurer (the
third respondent herein) to pay and satisfy the award, the interim
compensation of `50,000/- paid under Section 140 of MV Act was allowed
to be adjusted.
2. The claimant's parents brought this appeal seeking enhancement of
the compensation. During the pendency of the appeal the first
appellant/claimant (father) died and his widow (the second appellant) and
his daughter were substituted in his place.
3. The tribunal calculated compensation thus :
1. Medical treatment Rs 4,62,805/-
2. Loss of dependency Rs 4,87,890/-
3. Funeral expenses Rs 10,000/-
4. For pain and sufferings Rs 50,000/-
5. Loss of love and affection Rs 75,000/-
6. Miscellaneous expenses Rs 20,000/-_
Total compensation Rs 11,05,695/-
Less Interim Compensation Rs 50,000/-_
TOTAL Rs 10,55,695/-
4. The grievance of the claimants in appeal essentially is that during the
treatment of Banmeet Singh in hospital he was kept on ventilator which
resulted in expenditure of `1 lakh. The tribunal noted in the judgment this
submission and claim but kept the award on this account only at `20,000/-
on the ground the medical bills only to the tune of `4,42,805/- had been
submitted. It is well known that proof of each and every head of
expenditure incurred during treatment undertaken in emergency situation
may not always be available. The evidence led about the ventilator charges
having been paid in the sum of `1 lakh has gone unrebutted. Therefore,
there was no basis for the tribunal to have assessed the said expenditure
vaguely in the sum of `20,000/-. In this view, the medical treatment
expenditure have to be compensated more by adding the sum of `80,000/-.
5. The submission of the insurance company that the award of `50,000/-
towards pain and suffering was impermissible is correct. The compensation
under the said non-pecuniary head of damages is personal to the victim and
is not available to the dependent family members after his demise. Thus, the
direction to that extent given by the tribunal will have to be set aside.
6. There is substance in the grievance about inadequacy of the awards
under the heads of funeral expenses and loss of love & affection. It is noted
that there is no award given under the loss to estate. Following the view
taken in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and
Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015) 9 SCC 150, compensation in the
sum of `1 lakh on account of love & affection and `25,000/- each towards
loss of estate and funeral expense are added. The grant of `20,000/- under
the head of miscellaneous expenses as given by the tribunal is maintained.
Thus, the total compensation payable in the case comes to (5,42,805 +
4,87,890 + 1,00,000 + 25,000 + 25,000 + 20,000) `12,00,695/- rounded off
to `-12,01,000/-.
7. Following the consistent view taken by this Court [see judgment dated
22.02.2016 in MAC.APP. 165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta
Devi & Ors.] the rate of interest is increased to 9% per annum from the date
of filing of the petition till realization.
8. Since the claimant father has died, in absence of any proof with
regard to dependency of the daughter who also has been substituted in his
place, it is directed that the entire compensation awarded, as modified
above, shall be payable to the second appellant (claimant mother) only.
9. The learned counsel for the claimants submits that the amount
awarded by the tribunal has already been received. The insurance company
shall now be obliged to deposit the balance in terms of the modified award
with the tribunal within 30 days of today whereupon it shall be released to
the claimant as per above directions.
10. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K. GAUBA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 28, 2016
VLD
