Delhi High Court
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Shobha & Ors. on 22 September, 2017
$~R-257 & 258
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 22nd September, 2017
+ MAC APPEAL No. 744/2010
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Amit Gaur & Mr. Pradeep
Gaur, Advs.
versus
SHOBHA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. O.P. Mainee, Adv. for R-3
to 5.
+ MAC APPEAL No. 780/2011
SHOBHA & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. O.P. Mainee, Adv.
versus
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Gaur & Mr. Pradeep
Gaur, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. Sunil Dutt Sharma died in motor vehicular accident that
occurred on 02.01.2009 involving negligent driving of truck bearing
registration no. HR 12A 8635, admittedly insured against third party
risk with Oriental Insurance Company (appellant in MAC Appeal No.
744/2010). The members of his family dependent on him, they being
appellants in MAC Appeal No. 780/2011 (collectively, the claimants)
instituted accident claim case (suit no. 109/2009) on 13.03.2009,
seeking compensation under Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The claim was accepted by the tribunal, by judgment dated
12.08.2010, whereby compensation in the total sum of Rs. 12,68,000/-
was awarded with interest @ 7.5 % per annum, the liability having
been fastened on the insurer. The said amount included Rs.
12,48,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs. 5,000/- each towards loss
to estate and funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of
consortium.
2. While the insurer by its appeal (MAC Appeal no. 744/2010)
questions the computation of loss of dependency submitting that the
income was wrongly assessed at Rs. 12,000/- per month, the claimants
by their appeal (MAC Appeal No. 780/2011) raise grievance about the
non-pecuniary damages and rate of interest submitting that the same
are inadequate.
3. It appears that the deceased had submitted income-tax return
(ITR) for the assessment year 2006-2007 in September, 2006, copy
whereof was submitted before the tribunal (page 203 of the tribunal's
record). The claimants also led evidence by examining Sunil Sharma
(PW-3) and Dinesh Sharma to prove salary certificates (Ex.PW-1/2
and Ex.PW-1/3), to show that the deceased was working as driver on
part time basis with each of them. It is on the basis of such evidence
that the tribunal concluded that the income was Rs. 12,000/- per
month, such claim finding corroboration from the other record
including the passbook of the bank account maintained by the
deceased. In this view of the matter, this Court declines to interfere
with the finding on the income of the deceased.
4. In view of the rulings in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors.,
(2013) 9 SCC 54 and Shashikala V. Gangalakshmamma (2015) 9 SCC
150, the non-pecuniary damages are found to be inadequate. The
awards of Rs. 1,00,000/- each towards loss of love & affection and
loss of consortium and Rs. 25,000/- each towards loss of estate and
funeral expenses are granted. Thus, there would be a net increase in
the award by (2,50,000 - 20,000) Rs. 2,30,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs
Thirty Thousand Only). Ordered accordingly.
5. The tribunal's record shows that in para 13 of the impugned
judgment (page 85 of the tribunal's record), that the first claimant
Shobha had died on 13.05.2010. Thus the award was distributed in
equal shares amongst the remaining claimants. The sixth claimant
Harnand Singh died during the pendency of the appeal on 16.08.2014
and consequently his name was struck off.
6. In these circumstances, it is directed that the enhanced portion
of the award shall be distributed in equal proportions amongst the
remaining claimants.
7. The statutory deposit made by the insurance company shall be
refunded.
8. Both appeals are disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
SEPTEMBER 22, 2017
nk
