Delhi High Court
Kamlesh & Anr. vs Rahul Kumar & Ors (M/S National ... on 23 August, 2019
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 23.08.2019
+ MAC.APP. 751/2019
KAMLESH & ANR ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Rajveev Sood, Advocate.
versus
RAHUL KUMAR & ORS (M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD)
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar, Advocate
for R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 37745/2019 & CM APPL. 37746/2019 (for delay)
1. These applications seek condonation of delay in filing and re-filing of
the appeal.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the applications, the delay is condoned.
The appeal be taken on record.
3. The applications stand disposed-off.
MAC.APP. 751/2019
4. Issue notice. Mr. Shoumik Mazumdar, the learned counsel for
respondent no. 3 accepts notice.
5. At joint request, the appeal is taken up for disposal.
6. This appeal seeks enhancement of the compensation awarded to the
appellants. The facts of the case are that the deceased was pursuing an
under-graduate course i.e. he was in first year of B.Com degree course. In
other words, he was a matriculate. He was of 17 years and 10 months, at the
time of his demise. Insofar as he was a matriculate, minimum wages
applicable to a person so qualified, would be applicable and his being a
minor would not come in a way in computation of the Award, on the basis
of the notified minimum wages. In Mira Devi & Anr. vs. Mohd. Khalil &
Ors. MAC APP. No. 1129/2017 and MAC APP No. 174/2018, this Court in
its decision dated 04.09.2018 has held as under:-
"10. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Awards,
evidence on record and the decisions cited, I find that the
Tribunal has erred in relying upon decision in Chetan
Malhotra (supra) as the said case was of school going
children, whereas in the instant case, deceased and Injured
were working. Since their income is not proved on record,
therefore, it has to be assessed on minimum wages payable to
a matriculate as both of them were matriculates. Reliance
placed by Insurer's counsel upon Supreme Court's decision in
R.K. Malik (supra) is of no avail as the said decision pertained
to school going children. Even if it is taken that deceased and
injured were engaged in Distance Learning and were working
also, still their income cannot be assessed on notional basis. In
the considered opinion of this Court, the income of deceased
and injured has to be assessed on minimum wages payable to
a matriculate. The minimum wages payable to a matriculate at
the relevant time was ₹9802/- per month. Since deceased was
aged 17 years and 11 months, therefore, the applicable
multiplier is of 18. In view of Supreme Court's Constitution
Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680, addition of 40% has
to be made towards future prospects, whereas addition of
₹30,000/- is made under the non- pecuniary heads. In view
thereof, compensation payable to legal heirs of deceased-
Prateek Kumar is re-assessed as under: -
₹9802/-p.m. X 12 X 18 X 50/100 X 140/100 + ₹30,000/-
=₹15,12,062/-."
7. The same rationale and principle shall be applicable to the present
case as well.
8. Furthermore, in terms of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs.
Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. 2018 Scc Online Sc 1546, each of
the claimants shall be entitled to compensation towards "loss of consortium"
and "loss of love and affection" @ Rs. 40,000/- and @ Rs. 50,000/- each,
respectively i.e. Rs. 40,000x2 + Rs. 50,000x2 = Rs. 1,80,000/-.
9. Apropos compensation towards "funeral expenses" and "loss of
estate" @ Rs. 15,000/- each ought to have been and has been granted.
10. In view of the above, the amount payable to the appellant shall be
Rs.11,154/-(the applicable minimum wage for a matriculate) x 12 (months)
x18(multiplier)x50/100(50% deduction towards "personal expenses")x140
(40% towards loss of future prospect)/100+ 1,80,000/- +30,000/-
(15,000x2)=Rs. 18,96,485/-
11. Let the enhanced amount be paid, alongwith interest @9% from the
date of filing of the Award, to the beneficiaries of the Award, in terms of the
scheme of disbursement as specified therein, within three weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
12. The appeal is disposed-off in the above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
AUGUST 23, 2019
RW
