Delhi High Court
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance ... vs Krishna & Ors. on 5 July, 2018
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 5th July, 2018
3
+ MAC.APP. 595/2017
BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. M.P. Shahi, Advocate
versus
KRISHNA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Rakesh Gupta, Mr.Om Prakash
Gupta, Advocates for respondent
No.1.
Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate
as amicus curiae with Mr.Arihant
Jain, Advocate
4
+ MAC.APP. 169/2018
KRISHNA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Rakesh Gupta, Mr.Om Prakash
Gupta, Advocates
versus
BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. M.P. Shahi, Advocate
Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate
as amicus curiae with Mr.Arihant
Jain, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The parties have challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of Rs.6,40,000/- has been awarded to the claimants.
2. The accident dated 4th August, 2016 resulted in the death of Raj
Kumar @ Raju. The deceased was survived by his four brothers and two
sisters including a widowed sister. The widowed sister claimed
compensation for the death of Raj Kumar.
3. The deceased was aged 40 years at the time of the accident and was
working as a tailor. The Claims Tribunal took minimum wages of unskilled
workman as Rs.9,568/- per month, deducted 1/3rd towards the personal
expenses and applied the multiplier of 15 to compute loss of estate as
Rs.5,74,080/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.50,000/- towards loss of
love and affection and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total
compensation awarded is Rs.6,40,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC.APP.595/2017 urged at the
time of the hearing that the claimants are entitled to 15% of the income of
the deceased in terms of the principles laid down by this Court in Keith
Rowe v. Prashant Sagar, 2011 ACJ 1734. It is further submitted that the
loss of love and affection is no more permissible head in terms of the
principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pranay Sethi,
(2017) 13 SCALE 12.
5. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the future prospects of
25% have not been taken into consideration by the Claims Tribunal in terms
of Pranay Sethi (supra).
6. Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, learned amicus curiae submits that the loss
of estate @ 15% of the income of the deceased be awarded to the claimants
in terms of the principles laid down in Keith Rowe (supra).
7. Taking the minimum wages of Rs.9,568/- per month as income of the
deceased, adding 25% towards future prospects and applying the multiplier
of 15 and taking 15% thereof, the loss to the estate is computed as
Rs.3,22,920/-. Rs.15,000/- is awarded towards funeral expenses. The
claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.3,37,920/- along with
interest @ 9% per annum.
8. MAC.APP.595/2017 is allowed and the compensation amount is
reduced from Rs.6,40,000/- to Rs.3,37,920/- along with interest @ 9% per
annum. MAC.APP.169/2018 is dismissed.
9. The insurance company has deposited the entire award amount with
the Registrar General of this Court in terms of order dated 6th December,
2017. As per the calculation done by the Accounts Officer, the claimant is
entitled to compensation of Rs.3,86,100/- (Rs.3,86,073.6 rounded off) which
includes the interest as on today.
10. The Registrar General is directed to disburse Rs.3,86,100/- to the
claimant by instructing UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch as under:
(i) Rs.1 lakh be transferred to the savings bank A/c No.32030100006537,
with Bank of Baroda, Lajpat Nagar branch, New Delhi (IFSC Code :
BARBOLAJPAT) of claimant.
(ii) Rs.2,86,100/- be kept in two FDRs of equal amount for the period 6
months and 1 year respectively with cumulative interest.
(iii) At the time of maturity, the maturity amounts of the said FDRs shall
be credited in the individual savings bank account of the claimant
mentioned above.
(iv) All the original FDRs shall be retained by UCO Bank, Delhi High
Court Branch. However, a statement containing FDR number, FDR
amount, date of maturity and maturity amount be furnished to
claimant.
(v) No loan or advance or pre-mature discharge shall be permitted without
the permission of this Court.
11. The balance amount, after disbursing Rs.3,86,100/- to respondent
No.1, be refunded back to the appellant along with interest accrued thereon.
The statutory amount be also refunded back to the appellant in
MAC.APP.595/2017.
12. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by learned amicus
curiae in this matter.
13. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to learned counsels for the
parties under signature of Court Master.
JULY 5, 2018 J.R.MIDHA, J.
dk
