Delhi High Court
National Insurance Co Ltd. vs Varun Mahlawat & Anr. on 30 July, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: July 30, 2018
+ MAC.APP. 598/2017
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Rawat, Advocate
Versus
VARUN MAHLAWAT & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav & Ms. Ruchira
Arora, Advocates
+ MAC.APP. 601/2017
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Rawat, Advocate
Versus
VARUN MAHLAWAT ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav & Ms. Ruchira
Arora, Advocates
+ MAC.APP. 651/2017
VARUN MEHLAWAT & ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav & Ms. Ruchira
Arora, Advocates
Versus
PIYOOSH GUPTA & ORS (THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO
LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Rawat, Advocate
MAC.APP. 598/2017 Page 1 of 7
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
+ MAC.APP. 655/2017
VARUN MEHLAWAT & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav & Ms. Ruchira
Arora, Advocates
Versus
PIYOOSH GUPTA & ORS. (THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO
LTD) ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Rawat, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. The above captioned four appeals arise out of two separate Awards
of even date i.e. 16th February, 2017 relating to a vehicular accident
which took place on 22nd June, 2011. In this unfortunate accident, Sh.
Satish Kumar, aged 53 years and his wife Smt. Rajni, aged 48 years, had
died. Legal heirs of deceased Satish Kumar had preferred claim petition
No.456/2011 and claim petition No.457/2011 was preferred by legal heirs
of deceased Rajni. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (henceforth
referred to as the "Tribunal") had recorded common evidence but has
chosen to render two separate Awards.
2. In the above captioned first two appeals, reduction in quantum of
compensation awarded is sought by Insurer, whereas in the above
captioned third and fourth appeal, enhancement of compensation is
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
sought by legal heirs of deceased. With the consent of learned counsel for
the parties, these four appeals have been heard together and are being
decided by this common judgment.
3. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned
Award, is as under:-
"Brief facts of the case as revealed from the petition are
that on 22.06.2011, Sh. Satish Kumar (hereinafter referred to
as the "deceased") along with his wife namely Smt. Rajni was
travelling in the Car bearing registration no. DL-10C-1234
which at the relevant time was driven by Sh. S.C.Malik.
Further, wife of Sh. S.C.Malik was also sitting in the said car
on the rear seat and they were coming from Haridwar to Delhi.
Further, when at about 3:30 pm, they reached at Village Dadri,
suddenly a Truck bearing registration No. HR-55L-3280
(hereinafter referred to as the "offending vehicle") which was
going head of their car which at the relevant time was driven by
Sh. Peer Ali Gupta/R2 who without giving any signal rashly
and negligently suddenly applied brakes and though, Sh.
S.C.Malik, who was driving the said car properly and at normal
speed also applied the brakes, however, the car rammed into
the rear portion of the offending vehicle due to which all the
occupants of the car sustained injuries. It is also submitted that
the said accident had occurred due to rash and negligent
driving of the offending vehicle by R2 at the relevant time and
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
also that the brake lights of the offending vehicle were not
working and R2 had suddenly applied the brakes without giving
any signal due to which the said accident took place."
4. On account of death of Satish Kumar, a Lawyer by profession, the
Tribunal has granted compensation of `21,76,488/- with interest @ 9%
p.a. to his legal heirs, whereas in the case of Rajni, who was self
employed, compensation of `18,03,720/- with interest @ 9% p.a. has
been granted to her legal heirs.
5. The breakup of compensation awarded to legal heirs of late Satish
Kumar is as under:-
1.) Loss of dependency : `19,51,488/-
2.) Loss of Love & Affection : `1,00,000/-
3.) Funeral expenses : `25,000/-
4.) Loss of estate : `1,00,000/-
__________
Total : `19,21,992/-
6. The breakup of compensation awarded to legal heirs of deceased
Rajni is as under:-
1) Loss of dependency : `15,78,720/-
2) Loss of Love & Affection : `1,00,000/-
3) Funeral expenses : `25,000/-
4) Loss of estate : `1,00,000/-
__________
Total : `18,03,720/-
7. During the course of hearing, counsel representing both the sides
pointed out that in the breakup of compensation granted to legal heirs of
late Satish Kumar, there is an arithmetical error in totaling and it is so
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
evident from paragraph No.23 of the impugned Award rendered in claim
petition No.456/2011, wherein the total amount of `19,21,992/- has been
erroneously mentioned instead of actual compensation of `21,76,448/-
payable to legal heirs of deceased Satish Kumar.
8. Counsel for Insurer assails the impugned Awards on the ground
that the claimants were not dependent upon the deceased-Satish Kumar
and so, they are not entitled to compensation under the head "loss of
dependency". Regarding compensation granted under the "non-pecuniary
heads", it is submitted by counsel for Insurer that it needs to be brought
in tune with Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680. So,
it is submitted that the impugned Awards deserves to be modified.
9. On the contrary, counsel for Claimants submits that the
compensation granted by the Tribunal is wholly inadequate and it needs
to be suitably enhanced.
10. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Awards, evidence on
record and the decision cited, I find that it has come in the evidence of
Claimant-Varun that deceased-Satish Kumar had supported Claimants.
So, it cannot be said that the Claimants were not financially dependent
upon deceased. As regards addition towards "future prospects", it has to
be made in terms of decision of Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (Supra).
In the case of deceased- Satish Kumar, addition towards "future
prospects" has to be 10% and not 15%, as granted by the Tribunal. In the
case of deceased- Rajni, who was aged 48 years on the date of accident,
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
was self employed and so, addition of 25% towards "future prospects"
has to be made and the Tribunal has erred in not granting so. In case of
deceased -Rajni, the Tribunal has erred in relying upon income tax
returns of the year 2009-10, while ignoring her income tax return for the
year 2010-11 was filed on 31st March, 2011 i.e. before the date of
accident and in terms thereof, her income was `1,98,232/- p.a. after
deduction of tax.
11. In view of aforesaid, the "loss of dependency" in case of deceased
persons in question, is re-assessed as under:-
Sl. Name Loss of dependency Total
No. of
deceased
1. Satish `17,141/- X 12 X 11 X 110/100 X 3/4 `18,66,654/-
Kumar
2. Rajni `1,98,232/- X 13 X 125/100 X 2/3 `21,47,513/-
12. As regards compensation granted under the non-pecuniary heads,
I find that it needs to be brought in tune with Supreme Court's
Constitution Bench decision in Pranay Sethi (supra). Accordingly, the
compensation granted by the Tribunal to the legal heirs of deceased-
Satish Kumar and Rajni under the head of „loss of love and affection‟ is
disallowed. The compensation granted under the head „loss of estate‟ is
reduced from ₹1,00,000/- to ₹15,000/-. Similarly, „funeral expenses‟ are
also reduced from ₹25,000/- to ₹15,000/-.
13. Consequentially, the compensation payable to Claimants is
reassessed as under:-
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
Sl. Name of Loss of Loss of Funeral Total
No. deceased dependency estate expenses compensation
payable
1. Satish `18,66,654/- `15,000/- `15,000/- `18,96,654/-
Kumar
2. Rajni `21,47,513/- `15,000/- `15,000/- `21,77,513/-
14. Consequentially, the compensation amount payable to legal heirs
of deceased- Satish Kumar stands reduced from `21,76,448/- to
`18,96,654/- whereas, compensation payable to legal heirs of deceased-
Rajni stands enhanced from `18,03,720/- to `21,77,513/-, which shall
carry interest @ 9% per annum. The deficit, if any, be made good by the
Insurer within six weeks from today and thereafter, the modified
compensation be released forthwith to legal heirs of deceased- Satish
Kumar and Rajni in the ratio as indicated in the impugned Award.
Statutory deposit and excess deposit, if any, be refunded to Insurer.
15. With aforesaid directions, the above captioned four appeals are
disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 30, 2018
r
MAC.APP. 601/2017
MAC.APP. 651/2017
MAC.APP. 655/2017
