Delhi High Court
Pamila Bakshi @ Sangeeta Bakshi vs Dhani Ram & Ors. on 4 August, 2017
$~R-58 & R-59
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 04th August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 85/2009
PAMILA BAKSHI @ SANGEETA BAKSHI
& ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
versus
DHANI RAM & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Gaur and Mr. Pradeep
Gaur, Advocates for R-3
+ MAC.APP. 86/2009
PAMILA BAKSHI @ SANGEETA BAKSHI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Advocate
versus
DHANI RAM & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Amit Gaur and Mr. Pradeep
Gaur, Advocates for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. On 15.06.2005, Satish Kumar Bakshi, his wife Pamila Bakshi
and other members of the family were moving in a Maruti van bearing
registration no.CH-03E-2431 on public road from Jammu. During the
said journey, at about 1.30 p.m. in the area of Vijay pur near Thandi
Kui, Jammu, the van came to be involved in a collision with truck
bearing registration no.JK-02G-7120, admittedly insured against third
party risk with National Insurance Company Ltd. (third respondent).
As a result, all the occupants of the car including Satish Kumar Bakshi
and Ms. Pamila Bakshi suffered injuries, the former dying in the
consequence.
2. Several accident claim cases, including on account of injuries
suffered by Pamila Bakshi (suit no.111/07) and on account of death of
Satish Kumar Bakshi (suit no.112/07), were instituted on 13.09.2005.
All the claim cases were clubbed for inquiry on the conclusion of
which the tribunal rendered its decision by a common judgment dated
04.03.2008 whereby the case for compensation in each case on the
principle of fault liability was upheld, the insurer having been found
liable to indemnify and, thus, pay the compensation.
3. On the claim petition for injuries of Pamila Bakshi, she was
awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.7,82,000/- while in the
claim case arising out of the death of Satish Kumar Bakshi,
compensation in the total sum of Rs.5,25,000/- was awarded in favour
of the claimants. The insurer was directed in each case to pay the said
amounts with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the dates of filing
of the petitions till payments.
4. The awards in the above mentioned two cases are assailed by
the appeals at hand by the respective claimants seeking enhancement.
5. In the claim case arising out of the death of Satish Kumar
Bakshi, the award was calculated thus :-
Loss of Dependency Rs.5,05,000/-
Love, affection and consortium Rs.50,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs.10,000/-
Transportation charges Rs.10,000/-
Total Rs.5,75,000/-
6. The grievance of the claimants in appeal concern only the non-
pecuniary heads of damages and rate of interest levied.
7. Indeed, the award under the non-pecuniary heads of damages is
deficient. Following the rulings in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh &
Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015)
9 SCC 150, awards of Rs.1 Lakh each towards loss of love and
affection and loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- each towards funeral
expenses and loss to estate are granted in addition to Rs.10,000/-
towards transportation charges. This means there would be a net
increase in the award in the sum of Rs.1,90,000/-.
8. The award in the case for claim for compensation on account of
Satish Kumar Bakshi is increased by Rs.1,90,000/-. It is directed that
the entire enhanced portion with corresponding interest shall be
payable to the first claimant (Pamila Bakshi), it to be released in the
form of fixed deposit receipt in her name taken out from a nationalized
bank for a period of five years with right to draw monthly interest.
9. The compensation in the case of injuries of Pamila Bakshi was
calculated thus :
Medical treatment Rs.4,50,000/-
Conveyance charges Rs.10,000/-
Special Diet Rs.10,000/-
Future treatment Rs.25,000/-
Loss of earning capacity & loss of Rs.2,15,000/-
amenities of life
Loss of income Rs.20,000/-
Attendant charges Rs.4,500/-
Transportation charges Rs.12,000/-
Total amount of compensation Rs.7,81,500/-
Rounded off Rs.7,82,000/-
10. The grievance of the claimant in appeal is that the award under
the non-pecuniary heads of loss of amenities should not have been
clubbed with loss of earning capacity due to disability which has been
assessed to the extent of 40%. It is pointed out that the claimant was
43 years old at the relevant point of time and that the future loss of
income due to disability assessed at 40% in relation to whole body
was calculated with the multiplier of 11 instead of 14, per the ruling in
Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6
SCC 121. It is also submitted that the award of Rs.35,000/- towards
pain and agony and the rate of interest at 7.5% p.a. are inadequate.
11. Indeed, there is an error in calculation of loss of future income
due to disability as the calculation required the multiplier of 14 to be
adopted. The non-pecuniary heads of damages on account of pain and
agony and loss of amenities have not been properly addressed.
12. The loss of future income due to disability is, thus, re-computed
as (Rs.19,200/- x 14) Rs.2,68,800/-, rounded off to Rs.2,69,000/-.
Since the tribunal had awarded Rs.2,15,000/-, there would be an
increase in the award under this head by (Rs.2,69,000/- (-) 2,15,000/-)
Rs.54,000/-. Instead of Rs.35,000/- towards pain and agony and with
no separate award under the loss of amenities of life, the non-
pecuniary damages in the sum of Rs.50,000/- under each of the said
heads are added. This would result in further increase in the award by
Rs.65,000/-.
13. Thus, the net increase in the award on account of injuries of
Pamila Bakshi would be (Rs.54,000/- + Rs.65,000/-) Rs.1,19,000/-.
Ordered accordingly. The said enhanced portion of the award with
interest shall be released to Pamila Bakshi with interest in the form of
fixed deposit receipt in her name taken out from a nationalized bank
for a period of five years with right to draw monthly interest.
14. Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of
interest in each case is increased to 9% per annum 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.].
15. The insurance company is directed to satisfy the awards by
requisite deposits with the tribunal within 30 days making it available
to be released.
16. The appeals stand disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 04, 2017
yg
