Delhi High Court
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. ... vs Sudesh Sharma & Ors. on 31 January, 2017
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 31st January, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 806/2013
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar Gola,
Advocate
versus
SUDESH SHARMA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.S.R. Parashar, Mr. S.S.
Parashar, Mr.Anand Parashar,
Advs. for respondents no.1 to 6.
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.36,91,825/- has been awarded to
respondents no.1 to 6.
2. The accident dated 6th November, 2011 resulted in the death of
Rajesh Sharma. The deceased was aged 38 years at the time of the
accident and was survived by his widow, three minor children and
parents who filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. The
deceased was working as a contractor. The Claims Tribunal took his
annual income as Rs.1,98,923/- on the basis of his income tax returns,
added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/4th towards his
personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 15 to compute the loss
of dependency as Rs.33,56,825/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1
lakh towards loss of consortium, Rs.1 lakh towards loss of love and
affection, Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards
loss of estate, Rs.50,000/- towards gratuitous services and Rs.25,000/-
towards funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded is
Rs.36,91,825/-.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the
hearing that the future prospects should not be awarded to the
claimants. It is further submitted that the compensation of Rs.50,000/-
awarded towards the gratuitous services be set aside.
4. This Court is of the view that the law with respect to addition on
account of future prospects is well settled. Since the deceased was
aged 38 years at the time of the accident and his occupation as well as
income had been duly proved, there is no infirmity in the addition of
50% towards future prospects.
5. With respect to the second ground urged by learned counsel for
the appellant, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the
award of Rs.50,000/- to respondents no.1 to 6 towards gratuitous
services. This Court is of the view that the object of awarding this
Compensation is that the pecuniary loss calculated on the basis of the
Multiplier does not take care of all the losses suffered by the family of
the deceased. Apart from the pecuniary loss caused due to the death,
which is computable according to the Multiplier method, the family
also suffers loss on account of the services rendered by the deceased to
his family, such as the deceased may be personally guiding the
children in their education for which they now have to keep a tutor;
the deceased may be dropping the children to the school every
morning for which an alternative arrangement has to be made. The
personal care and attention which the deceased was providing also has
some value. The Courts in England earlier used to award damages
solely on the basis of Multiplier Method but the trend has changed and
damages are awarded under other heads as well and this law is
developing in our country as well.
6. The appeal is dismissed.
7. The Claimants Tribunal attached the account of the appellant to
recover the award amount in pursuance to which the appellants' bank
deposited Rs.42,28,628/- with the Claims Tribunal on 30th August,
2013. Vide order dated 30th August, 2013, this Court directed the
Claims Tribunal to release 70% of the aforesaid amount and keep the
balance amount in fixed deposit in pursuance to which a sum of
Rs.29,46,400/- was released to respondents No.1 to 6 and the balance
amount of Rs.12,82,228/- is lying in fixed deposit with the Claims
Tribunal.
8. Respondents No.1 to 6 are present in Court today. They have
been examined with respect to their financial status and financial
needs. Respondent No.1 is the widow aged 39 years, respondents
No.2, 3 and 4 are her children aged 18 years, 16 years and 14 years
respectively whereas respondents No.5 and 6 are the parents of the
deceased aged 60 years and 67 years respectively. Respondents No.1
to 4 have savings bank accounts with State Bank of Bikaner and
Jaipur, Railway Road, Sonepat, respondent No.5 is having savings
bank account with Punjab National Bank, Ganaur District, Sonipat
whereas respondent No.6 is having savings bank account with State
Bank of Patiala, Distt. Smalkha, Panipat. The particulars of their
savings bank accounts are as under: -
(i) Sudesh - Respondent No.1,
SB A/c No.61149856741,
State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur,
Railway Road, Sonepat,
MICR No.110003031,
IFSC No.SBBJ 00110593.
(ii) Shubham - Respondent No.2,
SB A/c No.61150990432,
State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur,
Railway Road, Sonepat,
MICR No.110003031,
IFSC No.SBBJ 00110593.
(iii) Ms. Shrishti - Respondent No.3,
SB A/c No.61150990556,
State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur,
Railway Road, Sonepat
MICR No.110003031,
IFSC No.SBBJ 00110593.
(iv) Master Sagar - Respondent No.4,
SB A/c No.61150990657,
State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur,
Railway Road, Sonepat,
MICR No.110003031,
IFSC No.SBBJ 00110593
(v) Raj Rani - Respondent No.5,
SB A/c No.0661001701050478,
Punjab National Bank, Gannaur, Sonepat,
MICR No.110024406,
IFSC No.PUNB 0066100.
(vi) Suraj Mal Kaushik - Respondent No.6,
SB A/c No.55028493348,
State Bank of Patiala, Smalkha, Panipat,
MICR No.50099,
IFSC No.STBP 0000099.
9. The Claims Tribunal is directed to instruct State Bank of India,
Tis Hazari Courts to discharge the FDR in respect of the 30% award
amount and disburse the FDR amount along with interest thereon to
respondents No.1 to 6 in the following manner: -
(a) Rs. 2 lakh be kept in 40 FDRs of Rs.5,000/- in the name of
respondent No.1, Sudesh Sharma, for the periods 1 month to
40 months respectively with cumulative interest.
(b) Rs. 3 lakh be kept 60 FDRs of Rs.5,000/- in the name of
respondent No.2, Shubham, for the periods 1 month to 60
months respectively with cumulative interest.
(c) Rs.3,00,000/- be kept in FDR in the name of respondent No.3,
Shrishti till she attains the age of majority. The monthly
interest on the FDR be released to respondent No.3 by
transferring the same to her savings bank account. On
maturity Rs.3,00,000/- be kept in 40 FDRs of Rs.7,500/- each
for the periods 1 month to 40 months respectively with
cumulative interest.
(d) Rs.3,00,000/- be kept in FDRs in the name of respondent No.4,
Sagar till he attains the age of majority. The monthly interest
be released to respondent No.4 by transferring the same to his
savings bank account. On maturity Rs.3,00,000/- be kept in 40
FDRs of Rs.7,500/- each for the periods 1 month to 40 months
respectively with cumulative interest.
(e) Rs. 2 lakh be kept in 40 FDRs of Rs.5,000/- in the name of
respondent No.5, Raj Rani, for the periods 1 month to 40
months respectively with cumulative interest.
(f) Rs. 2 lakh be kept in 40 FDRs of Rs.5,000/- in the name of
respondent No.6, Suraj Mal Kaushik, for the periods 1 month
to 40 months respectively with cumulative interest.
10. The balance amount, after keeping Rs.15 lakh in FDRs, be
released to respondents No.1, 2, 5 and 6 in equal proportion by
transferring the same to their savings bank accounts.
11. The original FDRs shall be retained with the bank. However,
the photocopies of the same shall be furnished to the respondents.
12. The maturity amount of the FDRs be transferred to the
respective savings accounts of the beneficiaries mentioned
hereinabove.
13. The parties are given liberty to approach this Court for
premature discharge of some FDRs in the event of any financial
exigency or marriage of respondents No.2 to 4.
14. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to learned counsels for the
parties under signature of Court Master.
JANUARY 31, 2017 J.R. MIDHA, J.
dk/rsk
