Delhi High Court
Sumitra Devi And Ors. vs Sanjay Kumar And Ors. on 20 July, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: July 20, 2018
+ MAC.APP. 179/2013
SUMITRA DEVI AND ORS. .....Appellants
Through: Mr. M.K. Sinha and Ms. Binisa
Mohanty, Advocates
Versus
SANJAY KUMAR AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. A.K. Soni, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. Impugned Award of 9th July, 2012 grants compensation of
`4,53,620/- with interest @ 9% p.a. to appellants-Claimants on account
of death of one- Ram Swaroop @ Kallu, aged 52 years, in a vehicular
accident on 13th October, 2009.
2. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned
Award, is as under:-
"Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the petition are
that on 13.10.2009 at about 9.26 PM the deceased Ram
Swaroop @ Kallu was crossing the road near Birla
Mandir, when a Tempo bearing no. DL-1VA-5650
coming from the side of Birla Mandir driven by
respondent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner and at a
high speed hit the deceased. It was further stated that due
to impact of the accident the deceased fell and sustained
grievous injuries and was taken to Dr. RML hospital
where he was declared unfit for statement and was
declared dead on the same day."
3. 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 : `4,33,620/-
2.) Funeral expenses : `5,000/-
3.) Loss of Estate : `5,000/-
4.) Loss of Consortium : ₹5,000/-
5.) Loss of Love and Affection : `5,000/-
_________
Total : `4,53,620/-
4. The challenge to impugned Award by learned counsel for
appellants-Claimants is on the ground that the Tribunal has erred in not
making any addition towards "future prospects" and the compensation
granted under the "non-pecuniary heads" is meager and it needs to be
suitably enhanced.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for Insurer submits that
compensation and rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal ought to be
reduced in light of Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & ors. (2017) 16
SCC 680.
6. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, evidence on
record and the decision cited, I find that the Tribunal has assessed the
"loss of dependency" while taking minimum wages of a skilled worker
and so, in the light of Supreme Court's decision in Pranay Sethi (Supra),
addition towards "future prospects" has to be 10% as the deceased was
aged 52 years on day of the incident. In light of the aforesaid, the "loss
of dependency" is reassessed as under:
₹4,380/- X 12 X 11 X 3/4 X 110/100 = ₹4,76,982/-
7. 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 by
the Tribunal under the head of "loss of love & affection" is disallowed.
However, the compensation granted by the Tribunal under the other "non
pecuniary heads" is certainly inadequate. The "funeral expenses" are
increased from `5,000/- to `15,000/-; compensation under the head "loss
of estate" is increased from `5,000/- to `15,000/- and compensation
granted under the head "loss of consortium" is also increased from
`5,000/- to `40,000/-.
8. In light of the aforesaid, the compensation payable to appellants-
Claimants is reassessed as under:-
S.No. Description Amount
1. Loss of Dependency `4,76,982/-
2. Loss of Consortium `40,000/-
3. Funeral Expenses `15,000/-
4. Loss of Estate `15,000/-
Total `5,46,982/-
9. Consequentially, total compensation payable to appellants-
Claimants is enhanced from `4,53,620/- to `5,46,982/-. A Three Judge
Bench of Supreme Court in a recent decision of Jagdish v. Mohan and
Others, (2018) 4 SCC 571 has granted interest @ 9% per annum on the
awarded compensation and so, in the instant case, interest @ 9% per
annum is maintained. Enhanced compensation alongwith interest be
deposited by respondent-Insurer with the Tribunal within four weeks and
it be disbursed forthwith to appellants-Claimants in the manner and ratio
as spelt out in the impugned Award.
10. With aforesaid directions, this appeal is disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 20, 2018
v
