Delhi High Court
Vishambhar & Anr vs Uday Bhan Yadav & Ors. on 23 November, 2017
$~R-549
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 23rd November, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL 767/2012
VISHAMBHAR & ANR ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar and Ms.
Pankaj Kumari, Advocates
versus
UDAY BHAN YADAV & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar, Adv.
for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Pinto, a bachelor, aged 19 years, suffered injuries in a motor
vehicular accident that occurred on 10.07.2007 due to negligent
driving of a motor vehicle described as Crane bearing registration
no.HR-55-F-2193 admittedly insured against third party risk with the
third respondent (insurer) for the period in question and died in the
consequence. On the accident claim case (MACT 446/10/07)
instituted on 18.08.2007 by his parents (appellants), the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) held inquiry and awarded
Rs.4,82,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a.
fastening the liability on the insurer to pay. The said amount includes
Rs.4,32,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.10,000/- for funeral and
transportation charges, Rs.20,000/- each for loss to estate and loss of
company. The loss of dependency has been calculated on the assumed
income of Rs.4500/- p.m., the multiplier of 16 having been invoked.
2. By the appeal at hand, the claimants seek enhancement
submitting that the multiplier should have been taken as 18, according
to the age of the deceased and the element of future prospects of
increase in income should have been added. The request also is made
for increase in the award under the non-pecuniary heads of damages
and the rate of interest.
3. Per contra, the counsel for the insurer points out that the
finding on the issue of income at Rs.4500/- is unfounded, there being
no credible evidence led to support the same. The counsel for the
claimants fairly submits that minimum wages of Rs.3470/- p.m. be
taken as the notional income. The element of future prospects of
increase in income, however, to the extent of 40% deserves to be
added in view of 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. Further the
multiplier of 18 has to be invoked according to the age of the
deceased.
4. The loss of dependency is, thus, re-computed as [Rs.3,470/- x
140/100 x 1/2 x 12 x 18] Rs.5,24,664/-, rounded off to Rs.5,25,000/-.
5. Following the ruling in Pranay Sethi (supra), the non-pecuniary
heads of damages as awarded by the tribunal cannot be approved. An
amount of Rs.15,000/- each under the heads of loss to estate and
funeral expenses are added. Thus, the total compensation in the case
comes to [Rs.5,25,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/-] Rs.5,55,000/-
(Rupees Five lakh and fifty five thousand only).
6. 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.]
7. Having regard to the dispensation already made in favour of the
first appellant, it is directed that the entire enhanced portion of the
award including the effect of increase in the rate of interest shall fall to
the share of the second appellant (Dewanti) / mother, it to be released
to her in the form of an interest bearing fixed deposit receipt taken out
from a nationalized bank for a period of seven years with right to draw
periodic interest. The insurer is directed to satisfy the enhanced award
by requisite deposit with the tribunal within 30 days making it
available to be released to the claimant.
8. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
NOVEMBER 23, 2017
yg
