Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Rohit Kumar & Ors. on 14 July, 2017
$~17 & 19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 14th July, 2017
17
+ MAC APP.797/2014 & CM 14459/2014
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. A. K. Soni, Advocate
versus
ROHIT KUMAR & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Yogesh Swroop, Mr. Kapil K.
Kaushik, Advocates for respondent
no.1
19
+ MAC APP.764/2015 & CMs 22623-22624/2015
ROHIT KUMAR ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Yogesh Swroop, Mr. Kapil K.
Kaushik, Advocates
versus
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD. & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. A. K. Soni, Advocate for
respondent no.1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Vide award dated 24th July, 2014, the Claims Tribunal has awarded
Rs.18,76,950/- to Rohit Kumar. Both the parties have challenged the
impugned award. The appellant in MAC APP.797/2014 is seeking reduction
whereas the appellant in MAC APP.764/2015 is seeking enhancement of the
award amount.
2. On 3rd November, 2012, Rohit Kumar was returning home on foot
from Sanya Vihar, Ghaziabad. When Rohit reached the divider on NH-24 in
front of Sanya Vihar, a Tata container no.HR-38M-8702 came from Lal
Kuan side and ran over his right leg. Rohit was taken to Yashoda Hospital,
Ghaziabad where his right leg was amputated. Rohit was working as a
Supervisor/Field Officer with Balaji Industries and Services and he claimed
to be earning Rs.15,000/- per month.
3. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.41,772/- towards expenditure on
treatment, Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance and special diet, Rs.17,628/-
towards nursing attendant, Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and sufferings,
Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, Rs.1,50,000/-
towards disfiguration and Rs.75,000/- towards loss of marriage prospects.
The Claims Tribunal took the functional disability of the injured to be 40%
and awarded Rs.11,42,294/- by applying the multiplier of 18 and taking the
functional disability as 40%. The total compensation awarded is
Rs.18,76,950/-.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC APP.797/2014 urged at the
time of the hearing that the future prospects should not be taken into
consideration for computing the loss of earning capacity.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC APP.764/2015 urged at the
time of the hearing that Rs.7 lakh be awarded for artificial limb fixed by
M/s. Endolite India Limited by the order of this Court on 15th February,
2017. It is submitted that the Claims Tribunal has awarded only Rs.1 lakh
for fixing of artificial limb. Learned counsel seeks enhancement of Rs.6
lakh under the head of fixing of artificial limb. It is further submitted that
the Claims Tribunal has taken the loss of earning capacity as 40% whereas
the loss of earning capacity is more than 50%.
6. The injured is present in Court and his condition has been seen.
Considering the present condition of the injured, the loss of functional
disability and earning capacity is increased from 40% to 50%.
7. The Claims Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as the
minimum wages of Rs.8,814/- and added 50% thereon. The appellant was
working as a Supervisor/Field Officer at the time of the accident. This Court
is of the view that since the occupation of the deceased had been proved as
Supervisor/Field Officer, the income of the deceased can be safely presumed
to be Rs.13,221/- per month. The law is well settled in this regard. It is not
always necessary to resort to minimum wages to assume the income of the
deceased. Reference be made to Municipal Corporation of Delhi v.
Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, AIR 2012 SC 100 in which 59
persons died in Uphaar tragedy in 1997 and the Supreme Court granted
compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the victims above 20 years of age by
taking their income as Rs.8,333/- per month whereas the minimum wages at
the relevant time were less than Rs.2600/-. Considering the nature of job of
the injured, the income of the deceased is assumed to be Rs.13,221/- and no
future prospects are added thereon. Applying the multiplier of 18 and taking
the functional disability as 50%, the appellant/injured is entitled to loss of
earning capacity of Rs.14,27,868/-. The Claims Tribunal has awarded only
Rs.1 lakh for fixing of artificial limb, whereas the cost of artificial limb in
this case is Rs.7 lakhs. The cost of artificial limb is enhanced form Rs.1 lakh
to Rs.7 lakhs. The compensation awarded under the other heads is just, fair
and reasonable and does not warrant any interference. The appellant is
entitled to total compensation of Rs.27,62,524/- as per breakup given
hereunder:
- Expenses towards medical bills Rs. 41,772/-
- Compensation towards conveyance and Rs. 15,000/-
special diet
- Compensation towards attendant charges for Rs. 17,628/-
two months
- Compensation towards prosthetic leg Rs. 7,00,000/-
- Loss of earning for four months Rs. 35,256/-
- Loss of future earning due to functional Rs. 14,27,868/-
disability
- Compensation towards pain and suffering Rs. 1,50,000/-
- Loss of amenities and enjoyment Rs. 1,50,000/-
- Compensation towards disfiguration Rs. 1,50,000/-
- Loss of marriage prospects Rs. 75,000/-
TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 27,62,524/-
8. MAC APP.764/2015 is allowed and the compensation amount is
enhanced from Rs.18,76,950/- to Rs.27,62,524/- along with interest @ 9%
per annum from the date of the filing of the claim i.e. 4th March, 2013.
MAC APP.797/2014 is dismissed.
9. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited has deposited
Rs.21,40,751/- with the Registrar General of this Court in terms of order
dated 3rd September, 2014 out of which 60% amount has already been
released to the injured and the balance amount is lying in fixed deposit.
10. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited is directed to deposit
the enhanced award amount with the Registrar General of this Court within
four weeks.
11. List for disbursement of the award amount on 24th August, 2017.
12. The statutory amount be refunded back to the insurance company after
deposit of the enhanced award amount.
13. The claimant shall remain present in Court on the next date of hearing
along with the passbook of his savings bank account near the place of his
residence as well as PAN card and Aadhar card.
14. The pending applications are disposed of.
15. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsel for the parties under
the signature of the Court Master.
JULY 14, 2017 J.R. MIDHA, J.
Dk
