Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd vs Rani Bala & Ors on 5 July, 2017
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 5th July, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 31/2016 and CM 1354/2016
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajat B., Advocate
versus
RANI BALA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Gulab Singh, 72 years old, met with an accident on account of
negligent driving of Taxi bearing no.HR-55T-8822 at about 9.00 a.m.
on 23.06.2014 and died in the consequence. The taxi is stated to have
been owned and driven at the relevant point of time by the ninth
respondent, it being covered against third party risk with the appellant
insurance company for the relevant period.
2. On accident claim case (MACP 455/DAR/2014) instituted on
03.11.2014 in the wake of a detailed accident report (DAR) submitted
in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for and on behalf of first to
eighth respondents (collectively described as the claimants), the
Tribunal, after inquiry, by judgment dated 16.11.2015 awarded
compensation in the sum of Rs.13,35,595/- with interest at the rate of
10% p.a.
3. The Insurance company, which has been burdened with the
liability to pay, is in appeal questioning the computation of the
compensation.
4. The first contention urged by the appellant concerns the
calculation of loss of dependency. It is pointed out that the Tribunal
assumed the income of the deceased on the basis of minimum wages in
absence of any formal proof at Rs.8,554/- p.m. It, however, made a
deduction of 1/5th on account of personal and living expenses on the
ground that there were eight defendants. This apparently was incorrect
as respondent nos.2 to 8 are grown up married children of the
deceased. There is no evidence led on record to show that they were
financially dependent on the deceased. In these circumstances, only
the widow, the first respondent, should have been treated as the
dependent, entitled to compensation on account of loss of dependency.
The deduction, thus, will have to be made to the extent of 50%.
5. Applying the multiplier of five (05), which was correctly
adopted keeping in view the age of the deceased, the loss of
dependency works out to (8554/2 x 12 x 5) = Rs.2,56,620/-, rounded
off to Rs.2,60,000/-.
6. The Tribunal awarded Rs.7 Lakhs towards loss of love and
affection in addition to Rs.1 Lakh towards loss of consortium.
Following the consistent view taken by this Court, having regard to the
date of the accident, non-pecuniary damages under these heads at
Rs.1,50,000/- each are added. [see Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh &
Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 and Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015) 9
SCC 150]
7. The Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses and
Rs.1 Lakh towards loss to estate. This again is not based on any set
criteria. Following the consistent view taken by this court, award of
Rs.50,000/- each against these two heads is added. [see
MAC.APP.No.160/2015 Shriram General Insurance Co Ltd v. Usha,
decided by this court on 05.05.2016]
8. The total compensation thus works out in the sum of
(Rs.2,60,000/- + Rs.50,000/- + Rs.50,000/- + Rs.1,50,000/- +
Rs.1,50,000/-) Rs.6,60,000/-.
9. The award is modified to Rs.6,60,000/-. Needless to add, the
interim compensation shall have to be adjusted and the balance shall be
payable with interest.
10. Following the consistent view taken by this court, rate of interest
is modified to 9% p.a. [see judgment dated 22.02.2016 in MAC.APP.
165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta Devi & Ors.].
11. In terms of order dated 15.01.2016, the insurance company
would have deposited the entire awarded amount with up-to-date
interest with the tribunal, out of which 40% has already been released
in terms of the impugned judgment. The balance, in entirely, shall be
released to the first respondent only with requisite precaution for
protection of the corpus.
12. The statutory amount shall be refunded.
13. The appeal and the pending application are disposed of in above
terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
JULY 05, 2017/yg
