Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co Ltd. vs Prem Lata & Ors. on 28 August, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: August 28, 2018
+ MAC.APP. 869/2015 & C.M. 27364/2015
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate
Versus
PREM LATA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gurmit Singh Hans &
Ms. Aarti Manchanda, Advocates
+ MAC.APP. 870/2015 & C.M. 27054/2015
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate
Versus
BABLI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gurmit Singh Hans &
Ms. Aarti Manchanda, Advocates
+ MAC.APP. 873/2015 & C.M. 27063/2015
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate
Versus
LALITA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gurmit Singh Hans &
Ms. Aarti Manchanda, Advocates
MAC.APP. 869/2015 Page 1 of 8
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. Impugned Award of 25th July, 2015 rendered by Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (henceforth referred to as the "Tribunal") grants
compensation to respondents-Claimants, on account of death of a Driver-
R.Anil, aged 35 years; Driver- Raju Singh, aged 40 years and a Peon-
Ramesh, aged 28 years. Claimants-Prem Lata & Ors. (in MAC.APP.
869/2015) are the legal heirs of deceased- R.Anil. Claimants- Babli &
Ors. (in MAC.APP. 870/2015) are the legal heirs of deceased- Raju Singh
and Claimants -Lalita & Ors. (in MAC.APP. 873/2015) are the legal
heirs of deceased- Ramesh.
2. To render the impugned Award, the Tribunal has relied upon
evidence of Claimants/ legal heirs of deceased and other evidence on
record. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal to respondents-
Claimants with interest @ 9% p.a. in these appeals, is as under:-
S.No. Name of deceased Compensation Awarded
1. R.Anil `18,01,912/-
2. Raju Singh `25,16,500/-
3. Ramesh `33,91,696/-
3. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned
Award, is as under:-
"Brief facts of the case are that on 16.10.2012 Sh.
Raju Singh (since deceased in suit no.18/13) was driving
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
the motorcycle bearing no. DL-5SY-5406 and his friends
namely Sh. R.Anil and Sh. Ramesh Kumar were sitting as
pillion rider on the said motorcycle and at about 00.05 AM
when they reached at Shankar Road (towards RML
Hospital) after crossing the round about, suddenly a
maruti esteem car bearing no.DL-8CB-4173 (hereinafter
called as offending vehicle) being driven in rash and
negligent manner by R-1 came from back side and hit the
motorcycle of deceased as a result of which they fell down
on the road. All the injureds were taken to Dr.RML
hospital where they were declared brought dead"
4. Since these three appeals arise out of aforesaid common impugned
Award, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties,
these appeals have been heard together and are being decided by this
common judgment.
5. While computing the "loss of dependency", the income of
deceased- R.Anil was assessed by the Tribunal on minimum wages
payable to an unskilled worker and multiplier of 16 was applied.
Deduction of 1/4th towards "personal expenses" and addition of 50%
towards "future prospects" was made. The break-up of compensation
granted by the learned Tribunal to the legal heirs of deceased- R.Anil is as
under:-
1. Loss of dependency(`8161X12X16) `15,66,912/-
2. Loss of Love & Affection `1,00,000/-
3. Loss of Estate `10,000/-
4. For funeral expenses `25,000/-
5. Loss of consortium `1,00,000/-
Total `18,01,912/-
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
6. The Tribunal has assessed the income of deceased- Raju Singh at
`13,000/- p.m. on the basis of Salary Certificate (Ex. PW7/1) and has
made an addition of 30% towards "future prospects". The multiplier
applied is of 15 and 1/4th towards "personal expenses" has been
deducted. The break-up of compensation granted to the legal heirs of
deceased- Raju Singh is as under:-
1. Loss of dependency(`12,675/-X12X15) `22,81,500/-
2. Loss of Love & Affection `1,00,000/-
3. Loss of estate `10,000/-
4. For Funeral Expenses `25,000/-
5. Loss of consortium `1,00,000/-
Total `25,16,500/-
7. In the case of deceased- Ramesh, Salary Certificate (Ex.PW4/1)
was made the basis to assess the "loss of dependency" while adding 50%
towards "future prospects" and by applying multiplier of 17. Deduction
of 1/3rd towards "personal expenses" was made. The break-up of
compensation granted by the Tribunal to legal heir of deceased- Ramesh
is as under:-
1. Loss of dependency(`15474/-X12X17) `31,56,696/-
2. Loss of Love & Affection `1,00,000/-
3. Loss of estate `10,000/-
4. For Funeral Expenses `25,000/-
5. Loss of consortium `1,00,000/-
Total `33,91,696/-
8. Despite service, the driver and owner of the insured vehicle have
neither contested before the Tribunal nor before this Court.
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
9. The challenge to the impugned Award by learned counsel for
appellant-Insurer is on the ground that negligence of driver of the insured
vehicle has not been established and so, the claim petitions ought to be
dismissed. Alternatively, counsel for appellant-Insurer submits that all the
three deceased were under the influence of liquor at the time of this
accident and so, it is a case of contributory negligence. It is pointed out
by counsel for appellant-Insurer that the registration number of the
insured vehicle has not been mentioned in the FIR and it was provided by
one-Krishan Kumar after about one month of the accident and the said
Krishan Kumar has not come forward to depose in this case.
10. On the aspect of quantum of compensation awarded to deceased-
R.Anil¸ counsel for appellant-Insurer submits that the Tribunal has erred
in making addition of 50% towards "future prospects" and infact,
addition of 40% has to be made in terms of Supreme Court's Constitution
Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi &
ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680. Lastly, it is submitted by counsel for appellant-
Insurer that compensation granted under the non-pecuniary heads needs
to be brought in tune with Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision
in Pranay Sethi (Supra).
11. On the contrary, counsel for respondents-Claimants refutes the
stand taken by counsel for appellant-Insurer and submits that the
compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and fair and so, these
appeals deserve to be dismissed.
12. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, evidence on
record and the decision cited, I find that on the negligence aspect,
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
appellant-Insurer has not got examined the driver of the insured vehicle.
On perusal of site plan of the place of accident and evidence on record, I
find that what to talk of negligence, even the contributory negligence is
not established. The manner of taking place of the accident is quite
apparent from perusal of the site plan of the place of accident. In the
considered opinion of this Court, the Tribunal has rightly relied upon the
plea of guilt taken by driver of insured vehicle before the criminal court,
to hold that the driver of insured vehicle was grossly negligent in causing
the accident in question.
13. On the aspect of quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, this Court finds that in the case of deceased-R.Anil, the Tribunal
has erred in making addition of 50% towards "future prospects" and in
view of Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in Pranay Sethi
(Supra), addition of 40% has to be made. Accordingly, the "loss of
dependency" in the case of deceased -R.Anil is reassessed as under:-
`7,254 X 12 X 16 X 3/4 X 140/100 = `14,62,406/-
14. So far as "loss of dependency" of legal heirs of deceased -Raju
Singh assessed by the Tribunal is concerned, this Court finds that the
deceased -Raju Singh was 40 years of age at the time of accident and the
Tribunal has erred in making addition of 30% towards "future
prospects". In view of Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in
Pranay Sethi (Supra), addition of 25% towards "future prospects" is to
be made. Hence, the loss of dependency of legal heirs of deceased -Raju
Singh is reassessed as under:-
`13,000/- X 12 X 125/100 X 3/4 X 15 = `21,93,750/-
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
15. In the case of deceased-Ramesh, loss of dependency has been
rightly calculated by the Tribunal.
16. The compensation granted by the Tribunal under the „non
pecuniary heads‟, needs to be brought in tune with Supreme Court's
decision in Pranay Sethi (supra). Accordingly, compensation granted to
legal heirs of deceased- R.Anil, Raju Singh & Ramesh by the Tribunal
under the head of "loss of love & affection" is disallowed. The "funeral
expenses" are reduced from `25,000/- to `15,000/- and compensation
granted under the head "loss of consortium" is also reduced from
`1,00,000/- to `40,000/-. However, the compensation granted under the
head "loss of estate" is enhanced from `10,000/- to `15,000/-.
Accordingly, the compensation payable to legal heir of deceased- R.Anil,
Raju Singh & Ramesh is reassessed as under:-
Name of Loss of Loss of Funeral Consortium Total
deceased dependency estate expenses compensation
payable
R.Anil `14,62,406/- `15,000/- `15,000/- `40,000/- `15,32,406/-
Raju `21,93,750/- `15,000/- `15,000/- `40,000/- `22,63,750/-
Singh
Ramesh `31,56,696/- `15,000/- `15,000/- `40,000/- `32,26,696/-
17. Consequentially, the compensation awarded to legal heirs of
deceased-R.Anil by the Tribunal is reduced from `18,01,912/- to
`15,32,406/- and compensation granted by the Tribunal to legal heirs of
deceased-Raju Singh is also reduced from `25,16,500/- to `22,63,750/-.
Similarly, compensation awarded by the Tribunal to legal heirs of
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
deceased -Ramesh is also reduced from `33,91,696/- to `32,26,696/- .
The modified compensation shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. and it be
released forthwith to respondents-Claimants in the ratio and manner as
indicated in the impugned Award. Statutory deposit along with excess
deposit, if any, be refunded to appellant-Insurer.
18. With aforesaid directions, the above captioned three appeals and
applications are accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
AUGUST 28, 2018
r
MAC.APP. 870/2015
MAC.APP. 873/2015
