Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Vidya Devi & Ors. on 31 January, 2018
$~17
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 31st January, 2018
+ MAC.APP. 1079/2017 and C.M. Appl. 44655/2017
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Prerna Mehta, Advocate
versus
VIDYA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.K.K.Kaushik, Advocate for
respondent No.1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of 17,31,898/- has been awarded to respondent No.1.
2. On 25th July, 2012, Vikas was sitting on the motorcycle as a pillion
rider driven by Ajay when they were hit by car bearing No.DL-3CAL-0562.
The accident resulted in injuries to Vikas as well as Ajay. However, Vikas
succumbed to the injuries on 30th July, 2012. The deceased, Vikas was
survived by his widow and mother.
3. The deceased was an electrician by profession holding a Diploma in
wireman trade from Lal Hnas Raj Gupta Industrial, Training Institute,
DSIDC, Industrial Complex, Narela after his 12th examination. It was
claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per month
from his shop. The Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.8,528/-
per month as income of the deceased, deducted 1/3 rd towards his personal
expenses and applied the multiplier of 18 to compute the loss of dependency
as Rs.12,28,032/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.2,53,866/- incurred by
the family of the deceased on the treatment of the deceased from the date of
the accident upto the date of his death. The Claims Tribunal awarded
Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of
estate and Rs.50,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total compensation
awarded is Rs.17,31,898/-.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing that the
widow of the deceased remarried after the accident and, therefore, is not
entitled to any compensation. It is further submitted that the personal
expenses of the deceased be taken as 1/2 instead of 1/3rd since only mother
was dependent upon the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks
reduction of the compensation under the heads of love and affection, loss of
estate and funeral expenses in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court
in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 SCC
OnLine SC 1270.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 urged at the time of hearing
that the widow as well as the mother of the deceased were dependent upon
the deceased and the mother of the deceased paid a sum of Rs.7 lakh to the
widow of the deceased before Panchayat by means of a cheque in terms of a
settlement which has been placed on record. It is submitted that the
compensation be computed by taking mother as well as the widow of the
deceased as dependents and the entire compensation be released to
respondent No.1 considering that the respondent No.1 has paid Rs.7 lakh to
her daughter-in-law who relinquished her rights in the compensation to be
awarded. It is further submitted that the Claims Tribunal has erred in not
taking the future prospects. It is submitted that the deceased was aged 23
years and 40% be added towards future prospects according to the judgment
of Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (Supra).
6. The record of the Claims Tribunal has been perused. The settlement
between respondent No.1 and the widow of the deceased was recorded on
02nd September, 2012 before Panchayat of village Pooth Khurd. The
Panchayat of village Mukimpur, District Sonepat, Haryana and the relatives
of the parties also participated in the settlement. As per the settlement,
respondent No.1 paid Rs.7 lakh to Promila, widow of the deceased, by
means of cheque No.664546 dated 02nd September, 2012. The Panchayat
recorded that the deceased married to Promila on 28 th January, 2012 and he
met with an accident within 6 months on 25 th July, 2012 which resulted in
death of Vikas on 30th July, 2012. Considering the age of Promila, the
Panchayat observed that Promila should get re-married and she should be
given the expenses for re-marriage by respondent No.1. The settlement is
signed by sixteen Panchayat members, inlcuind Promila. Copy of the
cheque No.664546 dated 02nd September, 2012 for Rs.7 lakh in the name of
Promila is also on record.
7. This Court is of the view that the Claims Tribunal has rightly
deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased considering
that the mother and the widow of the deceased were dependent upon him.
The Claims Tribunal erred in not adding 40% of the future prospects to the
income of the deceased. However, the non-pecuniary compensation
awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on higher side. Following the principles
laid down in Pranay Sethi (Supra) the non-pecuniary compensation is
reduced to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- towards loss
of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses.
8. Taking the income of the deceased as Rs.8,528/-, adding 40% towards
future prospects, deducting 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the
deceased and applying the multiplier of 18, the loss of dependency is
computed as Rs.17,19,245/-. Adding Rs.2,53,866/- towards medical
expenses on the treatment of the deceased, 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.20,43,111/-.
9. The respondent No.1 is entitled to compensation of Rs.20,43,111/-
along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution i.e. 05 th
November, 2012 till realisation. The appellant has already deposited
Rs.23,75,505/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal with the Registrar General
of this Court. The balance award amount be deposited by the appellant
within four weeks from today.
10. With respect to the amount of Rs.23,75,505/- deposited by the
appellant with the Registrar General of this Court, the Registrar General is
directed to disburse the said amount to respondent No.1 by instructing UCO
Bank, Delhi High Court Branch as under:
(i) Rs.14,40,000/- be kept in 120 FDRs of Rs.12,000/- each in the name
of respondent No.1 for the period 1 month to 120 months respectively
along with cumulative interest.
(ii) The balance amount, after keeping Rs.14,40,000/-, be released to
respondent No.1 by transferring the same to her savings bank account
No.10112637700 with State Bank of India, Pooth Khurd Branch,
Delhi-110039 (IFSC Code: SBIN0007446.
11. The maturity amounts of the FDRs shall be credited to the savings
bank account of respondent No.1 as mentioned above.
12. All the original FDRs shall be retained by UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch. However, the statement containing FDR number, amount,
date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by UCO Bank to the
respondent No.1.
13. No loan or advance or pre-mature discharge shall be permitted
without the permission of this Court.
14. Respondent No.1 shall approach the UCO Bank for completing the
formalities for the disbursement of the award amount in terms of this order.
15. List on 21st March, 2018 at 02:30 P.M.
16. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to learned counsels for the
parties under signature of Court Master.
17. This Court appreciates the fair assistance rendered by learned counsel
for the appellant to this Court in this matter.
JANUARY 31, 2018 J.R. MIDHA, J.
rsk
