Delhi High Court
The New India Assurance Company ... vs Suman Lata & Ors. on 27 November, 2017
$~R-575 & 602
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 27th November, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL 918/2012 and CM 14585/2012 and 3551/2014
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY
LTD. . ..Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate
versus
SUMAN LATA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: None
+ MAC APPEAL 1001/2012
SUMAN LATA & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: None
versus
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
& ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for
R-1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Vinod Kumar, then aged 49 years, employed in a private
service, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that had
occurred on 16.09.2011, due to negligent driving of truck bearing
registration no.HR-74-7756 admittedly insured against third party risk
with New India Assurance Company Ltd. (insurer) for the period in
question and died in the consequence. His wife and three other
members of the family dependent on him (collectively, the claimants)
instituted accident claim case (suit no.03/12), seeking compensation,
on 19.01.2012.
2. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) held inquiry
and, by judgment dated 06.06.2012, accepted the case that death had
occurred due to negligent driving of the truck by Ayub Khan, a
respondent in these appeals. The truck was registered in the name of
Jakir, another respondent in these appeals, at whose instance, the
insurer had issued the third party risk insurance cover. The tribunal
awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.15,17,500/- and directed
the insurer to pay with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a.
3. The insurer by its appeal (MACA 918/2012) has questioned the
impugned judgment on the ground that negligence on the part of the
truck driver was not strictly proved.
4. The claimants, on the other hand, by their appeal (MACA
1001/2012) expressed the grievance about the inadequacy of the
award primarily referring to the non-inclusion of future prospects and
the rate of interest being low.
5. Both appeals were admitted and directed to be put up in the list
of 'Regulars', to come up on their own turn by orders dated
14.01.2016. When they are called out for hearing, there is no
appearance for the claimants. The learned counsel for the insurer has
been heard and with his assistance record perused.
6. The tribunal has gone by the principle of res ipsa loquitur in
reaching the conclusion about the negligence on the part of the truck
driver. Noticeably, the contesting parties including the insurer did not
call upon the driver of the truck to depose and explain the sequence of
events leading to the collision. In these circumstances, the finding
returned by the tribunal does not call for interference.
7. 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., future prospects
to the extent of 30% deserve to be added. Thus, the loss of
dependency is re-computed as [Rs.12,500/- x 130/100 x 3/4 x 12 x
13] Rs.19,01,250/-, rounded off to Rs.19,02,000/-.
8. It is noted that the non-pecuniary heads of damages are not in
accord with the dispensation in Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, in their
lieu, Rs.40,000/- is added towards loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/-
each is added towards loss to estate and funeral expenses. The total
compensation in the case thus is worked out at [Rs.19,02,000/- +
Rs.40,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/-] Rs.19,72,000/- (Rupees
Nineteen Lakh and seventy two thousand only).
9. Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of
interest is increased to 9% (nine per cent) 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.]
10. By order dated 27.08.2012 on MACA 918/2012, the insurance
company had been directed to deposit the entire awarded amount with
up-to-date interest with the UCO Bank, Delhi High Court branch and
by subsequent order dated 02.04.2014, sixty percent (60%) was
permitted to be released to the claimants. Since the award has been
increased, the entire balance lying in deposit shall be released to the
claimants in terms of the impugned judgment. It is directed that the
entire enhanced portion of the award including on account of increase
in the rate of interest shall fall to the share of the first claimant /
Suman Lata (widow) only, it to be released to her in the form of a
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 with upto date interest with requisite
deposit with the tribunal within 30 days.
11. The statutory amount shall be refunded to the insurer after proof
is shown of the award having been satisfied.
12. Both the appeals and the pending applications are disposed of in
above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
NOVEMBER 27, 2017
yg
