Delhi High Court
Rajni vs Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd ... on 16 July, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: July 16, 2018
+ MAC.APP.147/2013
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani and
Mr. Junaidullah, Advocates
Versus
RAJNI AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate
+ MAC.APP.312/2016
RAJNI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate
Versus
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani and
Mr. Junaidullah, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. In the above captioned first appeal, exoneration from liability to
pay the compensation is sought by the Insurer, whereas in the above
captioned second appeal, enhancement of compensation is sought by the
Claimants. Since both the appeals arise out of common impugned
judgment, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties,
both the appeals have been heard together and are being decided by this
common judgment.
2. Impugned Award of 26th July, 2012 grants compensation of
`7,85,016/- with interest @ 9% p.a. to respondents-claimants on account
of death of one Om Pal aged 19 years in a vehicular accident on 27th
November, 2009.
3. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned
Award, is as under:-
"On 27.11.2009 at about 7:00 a.m., the deceased was
going from Chhawla to Bijwasan on his Scooter and when he
reached at Najafgarh Bijwasan Road, Baghera Mor, Delhi a
bus bearing No. HR 55C-0360 came from the side of
Chhawla at a very high speed and was being driven most
rashly and negligently. This bus hit the scooter of the
deceased from behind as a result of which the deceased fell
down on the road and suffered fatal injuries."
4. On the basis of evidence led, impugned Award has been rendered
by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (henceforth referred to as "the
Tribunal") and the breakup of compensation awarded is as under:-
1.) Loss of dependency : `7,40,016/-
2.) Loss of love and affection : `25,000/-
3.) Funeral expenses : `5,000/-
4.) Loss of Consortium : `10,000/-
5.) Loss of Estate : ` 5,000/-
_________
Total : `7,85,016/-
5. Learned counsel for the Insurer seeks exoneration by submitting
that the Tribunal in the impugned Award has concluded that the driving
licence in question was fake and instead of exonerating, recovery rights
have been granted to the Insurer. A limited challenge to the impugned
Award by Insurer's counsel is on the ground that in such a case, Insurer
ought to have been exonerated from the liability to pay the compensation.
6. On the contrary, learned counsel for the Claimant refutes the
aforesaid stand taken on behalf of the Insurer and submits that the
quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal is inadequate.
Enhancement of compensation is sought by Claimant's counsel on
ground that the Tribunal has erred in granting addition of 30% only
towards future prospects and in view of Supreme Court's Constitution
Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi &
Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680, addition towards future prospects ought to be
40%. Compensation under the "non pecuniary heads" is sought in terms
of Supreme Court's decision in Pranay Sethi (supra).
7. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, evidence on
record and the decision cited, I find that instead of exoneration, the
circumstances of this case justifies the grant of recovery rights to the
appellant-Insurer as the Insurer can always pay the awarded
compensation in the first instance and to recover it from owner and driver
of the vehicle in question. In the instant case, the deceased was aged 19
years and the Tribunal has assessed the 'loss of dependency' on the basis
of minimum wages of a skilled worker and in such a case, addition
towards future prospects has to be 40%. Accordingly, by adding 40%
towards future prospects, the 'loss of dependency' is re-assessed as
under:-
` 3,953/- X 12 X 2 X 140 X 18 = ` 7,96,925/- (rounded off)
3 100
8. As regards compensation granted under the „non pecuniary heads‟,
compensation granted by the Tribunal under the head of „loss of love and
affection‟ is disallowed. However, the compensation granted under the
head of „loss of consortium‟ is enhanced from ` 10,000/- to ` 40,000/-.
The „funeral expenses‟ are also enhanced from `5,000/- to `15,000/- and
the compensation under the head of „loss of Estate‟ is also enhanced from
`5,000/- to `15,000/-.
9. In light of the aforesaid, the compensation payable to respondents-
claimants is reassessed as under:-
S.No. Description Amount
1. Loss of Dependency `7,96,925/-
2. Loss of Consortium `40,000/-
3. Funeral Expenses `15,000/-
4. Loss of Estate `15,000/-
Total `8,66,925/-
Less (interim compensation `50,000/-
awarded)
`8,16,925/-
10. In the light of aforesaid, total compensation payable to Claimants is
enhanced from ` 7,85,016/- to ` 8,66,925/- which shall carry interest @
9% per annum. The enhanced compensation with interest be deposited
within six weeks by Insurer with the Registry and it be disbursed in the
ratio and manner, as indicated in the impugned Award. Statutory deposit,
if any, be refunded to Insurer.
11. With aforesaid directions, both these appeals are accordingly
disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 16, 2018
SRwt
