Delhi High Court
Satwanti And Anr. vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ... on 9 May, 2016
$~R-63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 09th May, 2016
+ MAC.APP. 497/2007
SATWANTI AND ANR. ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Bijender Singh & Ms. Vidushi,
Advs.
versus
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ORS.
..... Respondents
Through None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL):
1. Gaurav, 19 years, a bachelor, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular
accident that occurred on 11.04.2004 involving negligent driving of a motor
vehicle described as Tata-407 bearing registration no.DL-1L-8160 (the
offending vehicle) and died in the consequence. His parents (the
appellants), then aged about 49 years, instituted an accident claim case (suit
no. 195/2004) on 28.08.2004 impleading the three respondents herein as
parties, they being the insurer, the driver and the owner respectively of the
offending vehicle. The tribunal held inquiry and, on that basis, by judgment
dated 08.01.2007, upheld their case that death had occurred on account of
accident caused due to negligent driving by the driver of the offending
vehicle. This finding has attained finality as it was not challenged further.
By the impugned judgment, the tribunal awarded compensation in the sum
of `2,93,200/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
filing of the petition till realization directing the insurer to pay. The amount
thus awarded included `2,34,000/- calculated as loss of dependency on the
assumed income of `3,000/- per month on which the multiplier of 13 was
applied, besides `15,000/- each towards loss of love & affection and loss to
estate and `5,000/- towards funeral expenses.
2. By appeal at hand, the claimants sought enhancement of the
compensation and rate of interest.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the deceased
was a sportsperson with excellent track record. His participation and level
of performance was elaborately set out in the pleadings of the petition. It is
submitted that given such exceptional performance as shown by the
deceased in the various sports events, the income higher than the meager
amount of `3000/- should have been assessed. Reliance is placed on
Radhakrishna & Anr. vs. Gokul & Ors., (2013) 16 SCC 585.
4. This court has considered the submissions made. The case of
Radhakrishna (supra) cannot be of much assistance as the deceased, a young
person in the said case was pursuing professional course of engineering and
the court was able to make some assessment as to his income on the basis of
salary structure in the government employment. Unfortunately, in the cases
of sportspersons, there is no enough data available for any accurate
calculation or assumptions to be made as to the income which a sportsperson
would earn with such talent as has been claimed in the case at hand. At the
same time, however, the case of the deceased could not have been treated as
at par with that of an unskilled person. The skills and performance shown in
the sports activities require to be factored in. It is noted that the deceased
was a matriculate. In these circumstances, the income of the deceased is
taken as `3311/- per month. After deducting 50% towards personal and
living expenses, on the multiplier of 13, loss of dependency comes to
(3311/2x12x13) `2,58,258/-, rounded off to `2,60,000/-.
5. Following the view taken in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors.,
(2013) 9 SCC 54 and Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015) 9 SCC 150,
the awards of `1,00,000/- towards loss of love & affection and `25,000/-
each towards loss of estate and funeral expense are added. Adding the
amount of `24,200/- awarded towards medical expenses, the total
compensation is computed as (2,60,000+ 1,50,000+24,200) `4,34,200/-
rounded off to `4,35,000/-.
6. 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.
7. The award is modified accordingly.
8. It is directed that the entire enhanced portion of the award including
the effect of increase in the rate of interest shall be payable to the first
appellant (the mother) alone.
9. The insurance company is directed to deposit the amount payable
under the modified award with the tribunal within 30 days for it to be
released to the claimant.
10. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K. GAUBA
(JUDGE)
MAY 09, 2016
ssc
