Delhi High Court
Manjeet Singh vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on 10 April, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: April 10, 2017
(i) + MAC.APP. 359/2009
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate
versus
MANJEET SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
(ii) + MAC.APP. 407/2011
MANJEET SINGH ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
versus
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD .....Respondent
Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% ORAL
The above-captioned two appeals are directed against Award of
28th May, 2009 vide which compensation of `8,38,577.36/- (including
interim Award) with interest @ 7.5% per annum has been granted by
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
(hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) to injured/Claimant-Manjeet
Singh, aged 45 years, a constable in Delhi Police, on account of
MAC.APP.407/2011
permanent disability of 35% of left lower limb suffered in a road accident
on 8th February, 2007. The breakup of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is as under: -
Compensation for medical expenses `60,539/-
Compensation for conveyance `15,000/-
expenses
Compensation for special diet `15,000/-
expenses
Compensation for loss of income `32,137/-
Compensation for future treatment `10,300/-
and future loss of income
Compensation for loss of earning `6,05,601.36/-
capacity on account of permanent
disability
Compensation for pain and suffering `50,000/-
Compensation for loss of amenities of `50,000/-
life
`8,38,577.36/-
Less interim compensation paid `25,000/-
Balance `8,13,577.36/-
Rounded off `8,13,580/-
In the above-captioned first appeal, Insurer seeks reduction of
quantum of compensation granted whereas in the above-captioned second
appeal, enhancement of compensation is sought. The facts, as already
noted in impugned Award, need no reproduction as the subject matter of
these two appeals pertains to the quantum of compensation granted.
As per order of 9th November, 2009, service is complete in
MAC.APP.359/2009 and as per order 21st March, 2011, service is
complete in MAC.APP.407/2011.
With the consent of learned counsel for both the sides, the above-
captioned two appeals have been heard together and are being decided by
MAC.APP.407/2011
this common judgment.
To assess the 'loss of earning capacity', 30% towards 'future
prospects' has been added by the Tribunal while noting that
Claimant/Injured has difficulty in walking properly and in climbing stairs
and is incapacitated for any out of turn promotion on meritorious
grounds, etc..
Learned counsel for Insurer submits that addition of 30% towards
'future prospects' is wholly unjustified as Claimant/Injured is still in
service and has suffered no 'loss of earning capacity' and so, quantum of
compensation granted needs to be accordingly reduced. On the other
hand, learned counsel for Claimant-Injured seeks enhancement of
compensation by submitting that the compensation granted under the
head of 'pain and suffering' and 'loss of amenities of life' is wholly
insufficient and needs to be suitably enhanced. Nothing else is urged on
behalf of either side.
Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award and the evidence
on record, this Court finds that the evidence regarding the 'loss of future
prospects' is quite conspicuous and it is not in dispute that
Claimant/Injured is still in service. In any case, it cannot be ignored that
posting, etc., is quite restricted for Claimant/Injured in view of 35%
permanent disability suffered by him. In any case, addition of 30%
towards 'future prospects' is wholly unjustified and so, the addition of
30% towards 'future prospects' is set aside and compensation is
accordingly re-assessed as under: -
`8,532/- X 12 X 13 (multiplier) X 35% (permanent disability) =
`4,65,847/-
MAC.APP.407/2011
Accordingly, compensation granted by the Tribunal under the head
of 'loss of earning capacity on account of permanent disability' is
reduced from `6,05,601.36/- to `4,65,847/-.
Under the non-pecuniary heads, the compensation of `50,000/-
granted for 'pain and suffering' appears to be inadequate and is
accordingly enhanced to `1 lac. Likewise, compensation granted under
the head of 'loss of amenities of life' is also found to be on lower side and
is accordingly enhanced to `1 lac.
In view aforesaid, the compensation payable to Claimant/Injured is
reassessed as under: -
Compensation for medical expenses `60,539/-
Compensation for conveyance `15,000/-
expenses
Compensation for special diet `15,000/-
expenses
Compensation for loss of income `32,137/-
Compensation for future treatment `10,300/-
and future loss of income
Compensation for loss of earning `4,65,847/-
capacity on account of permanent
disability
Compensation for pain and suffering `1,00,000/-
Compensation for loss of amenities of `1,00,000/-
life
Total `7,98,823/-
Consequentially, the compensation granted by the Tribunal of
`8,38,577.36/- is reduced to `7,98,823/- (i.e.by `39,574.36/-), which shall
carry the same rate of interest as awarded by the Tribunal as the same is
found to be reasonable in the facts of instant case. In terms of interim
MAC.APP.407/2011
order of 30th July, 2009, awarded amount has been deposited by Insurer.
Out of it, `6 lac has been retained in form of FDR. After refund of excess
amount with proportionate interest to Insurer, modified awarded amount
deposited by Insurer be released to Claimant/Injured in the manner
indicated in impugned Award.
With aforesaid directions, both these appeals are disposed of while
modifying the impugned Award.
Statutory deposit, if any, be refunded to Insurer as per Rules.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
APRIL 10, 2017
s
MAC.APP.407/2011
