Delhi High Court
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Shakuntla Devi & Ors. on 10 August, 2017
$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 10th August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 261/2009
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Adv.
versus
SHAKUNTLA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. H.R. Jha, Adv. for R1.
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.10,15,000/- has been awarded to respondent
No.1.
2. The accident dated 19th November, 2004 resulted in the death of
Amardeep Singh. The deceased was aged 20 years at the time of the accident
and was survived by his mother and dependent unemployed brother. The
deceased was a graduate and was working as a teacher earning Rs.5,500/-
per month. PW-2, employer of the deceased appeared in the witness box and
deposed that the deceased was working as a teacher since July, 2004 at a
monthly salary of Rs.5,500/-. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the
deceased as Rs.5,500/-, added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/3
towards his personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 15 according to
the age of his mother to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.9,90,000/-.
The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and
affection, loss of estate and funeral expenses. The total compensation
awarded by the Claims Tribunal is Rs.10,15,000/-.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing that no
evidence was led to prove the future prospects and, therefore, the future
prospects should not have been granted by the Claims Tribunal. It is further
submitted that the deceased was survived by his mother and the personal
expenses of the deceased be increased from 1/3 to 1/2.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 urged at the time of hearing that
the deceased was a graduate working as a teacher earning Rs.5,500/- per
month. The occupation and the income of the deceased was proved by
examining the employer as PW-2. The deceased was aged 20 years at the
time of accident and, therefore, 50% towards the future prospects have been
rightly awarded by the Claims Tribunal. It is further submitted that the
deceased was survived by his mother and dependent unemployed brother
and, therefore, the deduction of 1/3 is justified.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent seeks enhancement of
compensation under the heads of loss of love and affection and loss of
estate. Respondent No.1 also seeks enhancement of interest of 7.5% to 9%.
6. The law with respect to grant of future prospects is well settled. In the
present case, the deceased was aged 20 years working as a teacher earning
Rs.5,500/- per month. The occupation and income of the deceased was
proved by his employer who appeared in the witness box as PW-2.
Considering the age of the deceased, the addition of 50% towards future
prospects is fair and reasonable. The deceased was survived by his mother
and unemployed brother who were both dependent upon him and, therefore,
deduction of 1/3 towards the personal expenses is also justified.
7. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and
affection, loss of estate and funeral expenses which is on a grossly lower
side. This Court is consistently awarding Rs.1,00,000/- loss of love and
affection. Accordingly, Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded towards loss of love and
affection; Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate and Rs.25.000/-
towards funeral expenses. Respondent No.1 is entitled to total compensation
of Rs.11,65,000/- (Rs.9,90,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.50,000/- +
Rs.25,000/-).
8. The Claims Tribunal has awarded interest @ 7.5% whereas the
Supreme Court as well as this Court are consistently awarding interest @
9% per annum. The rate of interest is, therefore, enhanced from 7.5% to 9%
per annum.
9. Though respondent No.1 has not filed written cross-objections, this
Court is duly empowered to enhance the award amount in exercise of power
under Order XLI Rule 33 of Code of Civil Procedure. Reference in this
regard is made to decision of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
Komal, 2014 ACJ 1540 in which the principles relating to the power of the
Court to enhance the award amount in the absence of the cross-objections
has been discussed.
10. The appeal is dismissed. However, compensation awarded to
respondent No.1 is enhanced from Rs.10,15,000/- to Rs.11,65,000/- along
with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition
i.e. 04th January, 2005.
11. The appellant has deposited Rs.7,67,500/- with the Claims Tribunal in
terms of the order dated 25th May, 2009 out of which Rs.1,00,000/- has been
released to respondent No.1 and the balance award amount is lying in State
Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts Branch. Respondent No.1 is present in
Court and submits that the original FDR is with State Bank of India, Tis
Hazari Courts Branch.
12. State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts Branch is directed to furnish
the particulars of the FDR along with the photocopy of the FDR and the
statement of interest released to respondent No.1 within four weeks. If the
said FDR has not been renewed up to this date, State Bank of India, Tis
Hazari Courts Branch shall renew the FDR from the date of its expiry before
sending the copy thereof to this Court.
13. The appellant is directed to deposit the balance award amount with
UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch by means of a cheque drawn in the
name of UCO Bank A/c Shakuntla within four weeks. The computation of
interest along with the proof of deposit be filed before this Court before the
next date of hearing.
14. Respondent No.1 present in Court submits that she has not source of
income and, therefore, she is not assessed to Income Tax. She further
submits that she will furnish the Form No.15G so that no TDS is deducted
by the appellant.
15. List for disbursement of the award amount on 13th September, 2017.
16. Respondent No.1 shall remain present in Court on the next date of
hearing along with the passbook of her savings bank account near the place
of her residence along with PAN card and Aadhaar card.
17. Copy of this judgment be sent to State Bank of India, Tis Hazari
Courts Branch for compliance.
18. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties as well as
Mr. Sanjiv Kakra, Advocate for State Bank of India under the signature of
the Court Master.
AUGUST 10, 2017 J.R. MIDHA, J.
ak
