Delhi High Court
The New India Assurance Company ... vs Bhawna Devi & Ors. on 2 November, 2017
$~R-394
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 2nd November, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL No. 841/2011
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.
versus
BHAWNA DEVI & ORS. .... Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. On 27.06.2010, a motor vehicular accident took place involving
truck bearing registration no. DL 1LG 3025 (the truck), it being driven
in a rash manner by the seventh respondent resulting in death of
Sanjay Kumar, giving rise to cause of action in favour of first to sixth
respondents (collectively, the claimants) to institute accident claim
case (suit no. 405/2010) on 27.08.2010. The appellant insurance
company (insurer) was added to the fray, it concededly having issued
an insurance policy against third party risk in respect of the offending
vehicle. The tribunal after inquiry, by judgment dated 23.07.2011,
held that the accident and death had occurred due to the negligent
driving of the truck. It awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.
13,18,000/- in favour of the claimants, the said amount inclusive of
Rs. 12,11,760/- towards loss of financial dependency. The liability to
pay with interest was fastened on the appellant (insurer).
2. The insurer, by the appeal at hand, questions the computation of
loss of financial dependency on the ground that it was based on adding
the element of future prospects of increase in income even though the
income had been assumed on the basis of minimum wages (Rs. 5280),
the deceased admittedly being an unskilled labourer. Reference is
made to the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court
rendered on 31.10.2017 in SLP (C) 25590/2014, National Insurance
Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. to argue that such element
could not have been added in the case of a manual labourer whose
income was being computed with the help of minimum wages. The
argument, in the alternative, is that if such element were to be added, it
should have been restricted to the extent of 40% as is the dispensation
in Pranay Sethi (supra).
3. The first limb of above argument has already been considered
and rejected by this Court by an earlier decision of this Court in MAC
Appeal No. 798/2011 titled Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company
Ltd. vs. Pooja & Ors., decided today itself.
4. The loss of dependency, thus, is to be calculated by adding the
element of future prospects to the extent of 40%. Calculated
accordingly, the amount is computed as (5278 x 140÷100 x 3 ÷4 x 12
x 17) Rs. 11,30,547.60/-, rounded of to Rs. 11,30,548/-. It is noted
that the tribunal had awarded cumulative Rs. 35,000/- under the non-
pecuniary heads of loss of love and affection, loss of consortium,
funeral expenses, loss of estate. Following the judgment of the
Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), the
compensation under the non-pecuniary heads are increased to Rs.
70,000/-, it inclusive of Rs. 15,000/- each for loss of estate and funeral
expenses and Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium.
5. Thus, the total compensation shall be (Rs.11,30,548/-
+Rs.71,202/-+Rs.15,000/-+Rs.15,000/-+Rs.40,000/-) Rs. 12,71,750
(Twelve Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Only).
The award is modified accordingly.
6. The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 7.5%.
7. Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of
interest is increased to 9% (nine percent) per annum from the date of
filing of the petition till realization. [See judgment dated 22.02.2016
in MAC.APP. 165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta Devi
& Ors.]
8. The insurance company would be liable to satisfy the award
accordingly, as modified above, by requisite deposit with the tribunal
within thirty days.
9. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
NOVEMBER 02, 2017
nk
