Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Seema & Ors on 8 September, 2016
$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 08th September, 2016
+ MAC.APP. 583/2015 & C.M. No.13267/2015
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajeev M. Roy, Adv.
versus
SEEMA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Chauhan, Adv. for R1 to
R4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of Rs.13,14,000/- along with interest @ 9% per
annum has been awarded to claimants/respondents No.1 to 4.
2. The accident dated 30th July, 2007 resulted in the death of Manoj. The
deceased was aged 34 years at the time of the accident and was survived by
his widow, one minor son, one minor daughter and mother who filed the
claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. The deceased was working as a
driver with Delhi Jal Board earning Rs.4,000/- per month. The widow of the
deceased appeared in the witness box as PW-1 to prove the occupation of
the deceased. PW-3 from Delhi Jal Board proved the appointment letter and
salary certificate of the deceased as Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW3/B. PW-4 from
Delhi Jal Board produced the record of the salary of four other persons
appointed along with the deceased Manoj Kumar who were drawing salary
to the tune of Rs.13,000/- in 2009.
3. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/-,
added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/4th towards personal
expenses and applied the multiplier of 16 to award compensation of
Rs.8,64,000/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- to each of the
four claimants towards the loss of love and affection, Rs. 20,000/- towards
the loss of estate and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total
compensation of Rs.13,14,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing of
the appeal that the future prospects should not be awarded to the claimants.
There is no merit in this contention of the appellant. The occupation and
income of the deceased has been proved by the claimants. The deceased was
professional driver working with Delhi Jal Board drawing a salary of
Rs.4,000/- per month. The deceased was aged 34 years at the time of the
accident and in normal course, the deceased would have served for another
26 years. Even if we do not take the future prospects of promotion to which
deceased was entitled, the actual pay revision taken effect from 2007 to
2033 years, the pay of deceased would be more than double. In New India
Assurance Company Limited v. Gopali and Others, (2012) 12 SCC 198
and Vimal Kanwar and Others v. Kishore Dan and Others, (2013) 7 SCC
476, the Supreme Court determined the compensation by granting 100%
increase in the income of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel further submits that compensation for loss of love
and affection is on a higher side. In view of lower future prospects taken by
the Claims Tribunal, the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal towards
love and affection of Rs.1,00,000/- to each of the four claimants does not
warrant interference. There is no merit in this appeal which is hereby
dismissed.
6. The appellant has deposited entire award amount with the Registrar
General of this Court in terms of the order dated 28th July, 2015 which is
lying in fixed deposit.
7. The Registrar General is directed to instruct UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch to keep a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- in fixed deposit in the
following manner:-
Sr. Duratio Resp. 1 Resp. 2 Resp. 3 Resp. 4
No. n of (Widow) (Daughter) (Son) Mother
FDR FDR amount FDR amount FDR amount FDR amount
(Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.)
1. 1 yr 80,000/- Rs.5,00,000/-of Rs.5,00,000/-of 1,00,000/-
the amount be the amount be
2. 2 yrs 80,000/- 1,00,000/-
kept in FDR till kept in FDR till
3. 3 yrs 80,000/- she attains the he attains the 1,00,000/-
age of majority. age of majority.
4. 4 yrs 80,000/- 1,00,000/-
5. 5 yrs 80,000/- On attaining On attaining -
majority majority
6. 6 yrs 80,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- -
7. 7 yrs 80,000/- shall be shall be -
released and released and
8. 8 yrs 80,000/- balance balance -
9. 9 yrs 80,000/- Rs.4,00,000/- Rs.4,00,000/- -
be kept in 4 be kept in 4
10. 10 yrs 80,000/- FDRs of equal FDRs of equal
amount for a amount for a
period of 1 period of 1
year, 2 years, 3 year, 2 years, 3
years and 4 years and 4
years. years.
TOTAL 8,00,000/- 5,00,000/- 5,00,000/- 4,00,000/-
GRAND TOTAL 22,00,000/-
8. UCO Bank shall release the balance amount, after issuing FDRs for
Rs.22 lakh, to respondents No.1 and 4 in equal shares by transferring the
same to their individual savings bank accounts.
9. Monthly interest on the FDRs of respondents No.1, 2 & 3 shall be
credited in the individual savings bank account of respondent No.1 and the
monthly interest on the FDR of respondent No.4 shall be credited in her
individual savings bank accounts.
10. At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be
automatically credited in the individual savings bank accounts of the
claimants/beneficiaries.
11. All the original FDRs shall be retained by UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch. However, the photocopies of the same shall be provided to
the claimants/beneficiaries.
12. No cheque book or debit card be issued to the claimants/respondents
without permission of this Court.
13. No loan or advance or pre-mature discharge shall be permitted
without the permission of this Court.
14. The claimants/respondents shall approach the UCO Bank for
completing the formalities for the disbursement of the award amount in
terms of this order.
15. UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch shall ensure that the savings
bank accounts of respondents are individual accounts and not joint accounts.
16. The respondents are at liberty to approach this Court for release of
further amount in case of any financial exigency.
17. C.M. No.13267/2015 is disposed of.
18. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under
signatures of the Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
SEPTEMBER 08, 2016
ak
