Delhi High Court
Sandesh Kumar Dutta & Ors. vs Gurdip Singh & Ors. on 3 August, 2017
$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 03rd August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 115/2009
SANDESH KUMAR DUTTA & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. C.S.S. Tomar, Advocate
versus
GURDIP SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Manoj R. Sinha, Adv. for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Saroj Dutta, then aged 55 years 8 months, working as Assistant
Accounts Officer in Government of NCT of Delhi, posted at the
relevant point of time in the office of Regional Director of the
Education Department, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident
which occurred on 02.11.2006 due to negligent driving of a bus
bearing registration no.DL-1PB-5511 of the second respondent, it
being driven by the first respondent and concededly insured against
third party risk with the third respondent for the period in question and
died in the consequence.
2. Her husband (first appellant) and two children (second and third
appellants), collectively, the claimants instituted accident claim case
(suit no.755/2006) on 18.12.2006 impleading the driver, owner and
insurer of the bus as party respondents.
3. After inquiry, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal)
by judgment dated 19.09.2008, upheld the case for compensation on
the principle of fault liability, the said finding having since attained
finality since it was not challenged.
4. By the above said judgment, the tribunal awarded compensation
in the sum of Rs.11,27,196/- with interest in favour of the claimants
directing the insurance company to pay. The said award included
Rs.11,17,696/- calculated as the loss of dependency besides
Rs.2,500/- as composite sum towards loss of estate and loss of love
and affection, this in addition to Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses
and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium.
5. The present appeal was filed seeking enhancement on the
ground that the compensation had not been properly calculated in that
the effect of the increase of the salary due to implementation of the
recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission was not
factored in and that the non-pecuniary damages as awarded are
inadequate. The claimants also submitted that the rate of interest
levied at 7% p.a. is deficient.
6. During the pendency of the appeal, the claimants (appellants)
sought liberty to adduce additional evidence. The said prayer was
granted and, pursuant to the opportunity given, the appellants
examined Mr. Suresh Chander (AW-1), a clerk form the Accounts
Department of Directorate of Education to prove last salary slip (Ex.
AW1/1) for the month of October 2006. The said salary certificate
shows the total emoluments earned by the deceased in the month prior
to the date of accident / death were in the sum of Rs.27,446/-. The
contention raised in the appeal that this should have been the
benchmark for the calculation of loss of dependency must be accepted.
7. The tribunal made deduction of one-third towards personal and
living expenses and applied the multiplier of 8, this taking into
account the age of the deceased. This was also not correct in as much
as for the age group 56-60 years, which would be the nearest, the
multiplier of 9 would have the appropriate multiplier. [Sarla Verma &
Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121].
8. The annual salary would work out as (Rs.27,446/- x 12)
Rs.3,29,352/-. It is noted that in the preceding financial year,
corresponding to the assessment year 2006-2007, the deceased had
made investments of over Rs.1 Lakh, which would result in reduction
in the income tax liability. Having regard to the rates of income tax
applicable for the assessment year 2007-2008, in case of women
income upto Rs.1,45,000/- was exempted. The rate of income tax for
the income beyond the said limit upto Rs.1,50,000/- being 10% and
thereafter upto Rs.2,50,000/- being 20%, the income tax liability
works out approximately to Rs.10,000/- which will have to be
deducted. The net annual income, thus, comes to (Rs.27,446/- x 12 (-)
Rs.10,000/-) Rs.3,19,352/-.
9. Thus, the loss of dependency is recomputed as (Rs.3,19,352/- x
2/3 x 9) Rs.19,16,112/-, rounded off to Rs.19,17,000/-.
10. Having regard to the date of the accident, following the rulings
in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and
Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015) 9 SCC 150, awards in the
sum of Rs.1 Lakh each towards loss of love and affection and loss of
consortium and Rs.25,000/- each towards loss to estate and funeral
expenses are added. Thus, the total compensation comes to
(Rs.19,17,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.25,000/- +
Rs.25,000/-) Rs.21,67,000/-. The award is modified accordingly.
11. Following the consistent view taken by this court, the rate of
interest is increased to 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition
till realization. [see judgment dated 22.02.2016 in MAC.APP.
165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta Devi & Ors.].
12. The tribunal, by judgment dated 19.09.2008, had apportioned
sufficient amounts to the second and third appellants. In this view, it
is directed that the entire enhanced portion of the award with effect of
increase in the rate of interest shall fall to the share of the first
appellant. The third respondent / insurance company is directed to
deposit the requisite amount with the tribunal within 30 days making it
available to be released.
13. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
Dasti.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 03, 2017
yg
