Delhi High Court
U P State Road Transport ... vs Shakuntla Devi & Ors on 18 April, 2018
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 18th April, 2018
+ MAC.APP. 119/2018
U P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Shadab Khan, Adv.
versus
SHAKUNTLA DEVI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Bhupesh K. Chandra, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of Rs.9,04,000/- has been awarded to
respondents No.1 to 7.
2. The accident dated 20th August, 2010 resulted in the death of
Naval Singh. The deceased was aged 50 years at the time of the
accident and was survived by his widow, two sons, three daughters
and father who claimed compensation. The deceased was working as a
baildar (labourer). It was claimed that the deceased was earning
Rs.9,000/- per month. However, in the absence of any proof of
income, the Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.5,278/-,
deducted 1/5th towards his personal expenses and applied the
multiplier of 13 to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.6,58,695/-.
The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of love and
affection, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.20,000/-
towards loss of estate and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses. The
total compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is Rs.9,04,000/-.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing
that the multiplier be reduced from 13 to 11 as the deceased was above
50 years of age. It is further submitted that the personal expenses be
reduced from 1/5th to 1/3rd as all the daughters of the deceased are
married. The appellant also seek reduction of non-pecuniary
compensation. Reliance is placed in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
Pranay Sethi, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1270.
4. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 7 urged at the time of
hearing that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded future prospects to
compute the compensation. It is further submitted that the multiplier
of 13 be maintained as the deceased did not complete 51 years of age.
5. This Court is of the view that the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-
awarded by the Claims Tribunal under the head of loss of love and
affection is not a permissible head as per National Insurance Co. Ltd.
v. Pranay Sethi (Supra). Therefore, the compensation under the head
of loss of love and affection is set aside. The future prospects of 10%
have to be added to the income of the deceased in terms of the
principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi
(supra). However, non-pecuniary compensation under the heads of
loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses are liable to be
reduced to Rs.70,000/-(Rs.40,000 towards loss of consortium,
Rs.15,000 towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000 towards funeral
expenses). The deceased has left behind seven legal heirs and,
therefore, the deduction of 1/5th towards personal expenses is upheld.
The deceased was aged 50 years and 7 months at the time of accident.
As per the Second Schedule of Motor Vehicle Act, as corrected in
Sarla Verma v. D.T.C., 2009 (6) SCC 121, the appropriate multiplier
after completing the age of 50 years is 11. The multiplier is, therefore,
reduced from 13 to 11.
6. Taking the income of deceased as Rs.5,278/-, adding 10%
towards future prospects, deducting 1/5th towards personal expenses
and applying the multiplier of 11, the loss of dependency is computed
as Rs.6,13,093/- (6,13,092.48 rounded off). Adding Rs.40,000/-
towards loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, the total compensation is
computed as Rs.6,83,093/-.
7. The appeal is allowed and the compensation amount is reduced
from Rs.9,04,000/- to Rs.6,83,093/- along with interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of institution of the claim petition i.e. 24th
December, 2010. CM No.3936/2018 is disposed of.
8. The appellant has deposited Rs.6,27,537/- along with interest @
9% per annum with the Registrar General of this Court in terms of the
order dated 06th March, 2018. The appellant is directed to deposit the
balance award amount along with up to date interest with the Registrar
General of this Court within four weeks.
9. List for disbursement of the compensation amount on 28 th May,
2018 at 02:30 P.M.
10. Respondent No.1 shall remain present in Court on the next date
of hearing along with the passbook of her savings bank account near
the place of her residence as well as PAN card and Aadhaar card. The
concerned bank is directed not to issue any cheque book or debit card
to respondent No.1 and if the same has already been issued, the bank
is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the
passbook to this effect. The respondent No.1 shall produce the copy
of this judgment to the concerned bank, whereupon the bank shall
make an endorsement on the passbook of respondent No.1 that no
cheque book and/or debit card shall be issued to respondent No.1
without the permission of this Court. However, the concerned bank
shall permit respondent No.1 to withdraw money from her savings
bank account by means of a withdrawal form. The respondent No.1
shall produce the original passbook of her savings bank account with
the necessary endorsement on the next date of hearing.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondent
No.7 has expired during the pendency of the claim petition and his
rights have devolved upon respondents No.1 to 6 who are on record.
Respondent No.7 is substituted with respondents No.1 to 6. The
amended memo of parties be filed by the appellant within three weeks.
12. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties
under signature of Court Master.
APRIL 18, 2018 J.R. MIDHA, J.
ak
