Delhi High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Laxmi Devi & Ors on 2 August, 2017
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 02nd August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 408/2016 and CM 18418/2016
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate
versus
LAXMI DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Vivek Bansal and Mr. Shiv
Shankar, Advocates for R-1 to 4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Pappu was driving the car of his employer on 05.09.2013 when
it came to be involved in a collision with mini truck bearing
registration no.UP-22T-2513 admittedly insured against third party
risk with the appellant insurance company (insurer). His wife and
three children, first to fourth respondents (collectively the claimants),
instituted accident claim case (MACP 39/2016) on 01.10.2013
impleading the driver, owner and insurer of the truck, the first two
now being fifth and sixth respondents in the appeal.
2. On the basis of evidence led during inquiry, the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), by judgment dated 18.03.2016, held that
the accident had occurred due to negligence on the part of the truck
driver. It awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.16,23,240/-, it
inclusive of non-pecuniary damages in the sum of Rs.1 Lakh each
towards loss of consortium and loss to estate and Rs.3 Lakh towards
loss of love and affection besides Rs.25,000/- towards funeral
expenses, the balance having been added on account of loss of
dependency.
3. The insurance company which has been burdened with the
liability to pay with interest at 9% p.a., by its appeal, assails the
finding of negligence submitting that the car driven by the deceased
itself had collided against the truck from behind. It also questions the
award under the non-pecuniary heads of damages.
4. The contention of the insurance company about the issue of
negligence must be rejected as the evidence clearly shows the truck
was ahead of the car and its driver had suddenly applied brakes
leading to the collision.
5. The award under the non-pecuniary heads of damages
undoubtedly are excessive. Therefore, setting aside the order of the
tribunal in such regard, having regard to the date of the accident and
following the view taken by this court in Shriram General Insurance
Co Ltd v. Usha, MAC.APP. 160/2015 decided on 05.05.2016, awards
of Rs.1,50,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and loss of
consortium and Rs.50,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral
expenses are granted.
6. The award granted by the Tribunal, thus, stands reduced by
Rs.1,25,000/-, it being modified to (Rs.16,23,240/- (-) Rs.1,25,000/-)
Rs.14,98,240/-, rounded off to Rs.15,00,000/-.
7. The Tribunal had apportioned the award by specifying the
amounts in favour of the first respondent (wife). By order dated
16.05.2016, the insurance company had been directed to deposit the
entire awarded amount with upto date interest with the Tribunal within
the period specified and out of such deposit, 50% was allowed to be
released to the claimants in terms of the impugned judgment, the
balance kept in fixed deposit receipts. Since the award has been
reduced, it is directed that the amounts already released to the other
claimants shall be treated as their share in the compensation, the entire
balance to be now paid to the first respondent (widow). The balance,
however, shall be released to her in the form of two fixed deposit
receipts of equal amounts for a period of ten years with right to draw
monthly interest.
8. The award is modified accordingly. The Tribunal shall release
the balance payment in terms of these directions from out of the
deposit made by the insurance company refunding the excess.
9. The statutory amount shall also be refunded.
10. The appeal and the pending application are disposed of in above
terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 02, 2017
yg
