Delhi High Court
New India Assurance Company Ltd vs Jyoti Prajapati & Ors on 23 August, 2017
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 23rd August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 210/2017 and CM APPL.9032-9033/2017
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Meha Aggarwal, Advocate
with Mr. Pranati Bhatnagar,
Adv. & Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.
versus
JYOTI PRAJAPATI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate
with Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv.
for R-1 to R-4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Rajesh Kumar, aged 29 years, employed as Store Manager with
a private entity, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that
statedly occurred due to negligent driving of truck bearing registration
No.HR-69A-8456 on 06.07.2014. The truck was admittedly insured
against third party risk with the appellant insurance company (insurer).
The wife and other members of the family dependent on the deceased,
they being first to fourth respondents (collectively, the claimants),
instituted accident claim case (Suit No.3860/2016) on 09.09.2014. The
said case and another fatal accident claim case also arising out of the
same accident were clubbed and on the basis of inquiry were decided
by common judgment of the tribunal rendered on 21.11.2016 whereby
compensation in the total sum of Rs.87,35,000/- (Rupees Eighty Seven
Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Only) was awarded, the liability having
been placed at the door of the appellant insurance company to pay
with interest @ nine per cent (9%) per annum.
2. The insurer has pressed the appeal at hand on two counts; one,
that the component of conveyance allowance at Rs.800/- per month
was wrongly included in income while calculating the loss of
dependency and, second, that in such computation deduction on
account of income tax liability was not made.
3. Having heard the learned counsel and having gone through the
record, this court finds no substance in either of the two contentions.
4. The insurer has relied on National Insurance Company Limited
vs. Indira Srivastava & Ors., (2008) 2 SCC 763, wherein it was ruled
that the amount which was required to be paid to the deceased by his
employer by way of perks should be included for computation of his
monthly income as that would have added to his monthly income by
way contribution to the family as contradistinguished to the ones
which were for his benefit. The allowance of Rs.800/- per month
towards conveyance, as per the evidence led, was a regular
emolument, it being part of the terms and conditions of the service, the
said allowance insuring ensuing to the benefit of corresponding
savings for the family, and, therefore, there is no good reason why it
should have been excluded.
5. The tribunal has taken care to make deduction of tax on income
going by the tax deducted at source certificate (Form 16) for the
Assessment Year 2013-2014, which was the last financial year just
preceding the date of death. Therefore, there is no error in the
computation.
6. The appeal is dismissed.
7. The insurance company had deposited the entire awarded
amount with interest in terms of order dated 06.03.2017 from which a
portion was allowed to be released by order dated 03.05.2017, the
balance kept in fixed deposit receipts in terms of the impugned award.
Some correction in the name of the mother, one of the recipients was
allowed by direction in the order dated 03.05.2017. The tribunal shall
now release the balance amount in terms of the impugned award.
8. The statutory amount shall be refunded to the appellant
insurance company.
9. The appeal along with accompanying applications stands
disposed of in above terms.
10. Dasti.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 23, 2017
vk
