Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Jaggan & Ors. on 20 November, 2017
$~R-510
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 20th November, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL 574/2012
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. .... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate
versus
JAGGAN & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Satish, aged 21 years, died in a motor vehicular accident that
had occurred on 21.03.2009 due to the negligent driving of a motor
vehicle described as Dumper bearing registration no.HR-55G-4213
admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question
with the appellant (insurer). The accident claim case (MAC petition
no.534/2010) by his parents and wife, they being first to third
respondents, instituted on 22.05.2009 was put to inquiry and, by
judgment dated 08.02.2012, compensation in the total sum of
Rs.8,88,200/- was awarded with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a., the
liability having been fastened on the insurer to pay.
2. The insurer presses the appeal at hand on the ground that the
third respondent (widow) having re-married, her dependency could
not have been considered. It also submits that since the income of the
deceased was assumed on the basis of minimum wages (Rs.3,950/-),
the future prospects will have to be restricted to 40% instead of 50%
as added by the tribunal.
3. The appeal was put in the list of regulars, to come up in its own
turn, by order dated 08.04.2016. When it is called out in its turn,
there is no appearance on behalf of the claimants.
4. The re-marriage of the widow took place 5-6 months after the
death. The right to receive compensation had crystallized on the date
the cause of action arose and, therefore, it is not correct to argue that
the widow claimant should be kept out from consideration. Since on
the date of accident, there were three claimants, deduction on account
of personal and living expenses has been correctly made by the
tribunal at one-third. Following the ruling of a 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., the
element of future prospects will, however, have to be restricted to 40%
in the present case.
5. Thus, the loss of dependency is re-computed as [Rs.3,950/- x
140 /100 x 2 / 3 x 12 x 18] Rs.7,96,320/-, rounded off to Rs.7,97,000/-
(Rupees Seven lakh and ninety seven thousand only).
6. It is noted that the tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- each
towards loss to estate, loss of love and affection and loss of
consortium besides Rs.5,000/- on account of funeral expenses. These
awards also have to be brought in accord with the dispensation in
Pranay Sethi (supra). Therefore, Rs.40,000/- is added towards loss of
consortium besides Rs.15,000/- each towards loss to estate and funeral
expenses.
7. The total compensation consequently comes to [Rs.7,97,000/- +
Rs.40,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/-] Rs.8,67,000/- (Rupees Eight
lakh and sixty seven thousand only).
8. Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of
interest is increased to 9% 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.]
9. The award is modified accordingly.
10. The tribunal had specified the amounts falling to the share of
each of the three claimants. Since the award has been modified, and
slightly reduced, such dispensation will have to be made afresh.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed
that 20% of the awarded amount shall fall to the share of the first
claimant Jaggan (father) and the balance equally divided amongst the
remaining two claimants with corresponding interest.
11. By order dated 21.05.2012, the insurance company had been
directed to deposit the entire awarded amount with up-to-date interest
with the UCO Bank. The said amount was directed to be retained in
fixed deposit receipt initially for a period of six months with provision
for auto renewal. The Registry shall now calculate the amount
payable to the claimants in terms of the modification ordered above
and release the same accordingly to the claimants refunding the excess
in deposit, if any, alongwith statutory deposit, to the insurance
company.
12. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
NOVEMBER 20, 2017
yg
