Delhi High Court
Meera Devi vs United India Insurance Company ... on 18 October, 2019
KAMLESH KUMAR
04.11.2019 16:15
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 18.10.2019
+ MAC.APP. 1132/2018
MEERA DEVI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Akhilesh Arora and Mr. Nikhil,
Advocates.
versus
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD & ORS
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral)
CM APPL. 53062/2018 (for delay)
1. This application seeks condonation of delay in filing the appeal on the
ground that the applicant is an illiterate person who did not have the benefit
of legal advice apropos errors in the impugned order. The bereaved parents
were grief stricken because of the loss of their young daughter, who was
merely 20 years of age. They were unable to come to grips with reality for a
long time, hence they were unable to seek legal advice, especially because
the previous round of litigation seeking compensation for reopening of the
psychological wounds. It took them some time to recover from their
immense loss and setback and then endeavour towards its closure.
2. In view of the above, the application is allowed. The delay in filing
the appeal is condoned.
3. The application stands disposed-off.
MAC.APP. 1132/2018
4. At joint request, the appeal is taken up for final disposal.
5. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 04.07.2016
passed by the learned MACT in Suit No. 118/16 on two grounds that: (i) the
multiplier of 11 has been applied on the basis of the age of the parents
instead of the age of the deceased. The latter was 20 years of age, therefore,
the multiplier of 18 ought to have been applied. The argument is valid.
Accordingly, multiplier of 18 is directed to be applied; (ii) the compensation
towards „loss of future prospects‟ should be granted in terms of the dicta of
the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors
(2017) 16 SCC 680. The deceased was below the age of 40 years and was
self-employed, therefore, 40% would be added towards "loss of future
prospects". It is so ordered.
6. The Court would note that the parents are also entitled to
compensation towards „loss of consortium‟ and „loss of love and affection‟
@ Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- each respectively, in terms of the dicta of
the Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram
@ Chuhru Ram & Ors., 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546. It is so granted.
Similarly, the claimants would also be entitled to and are granted
compensation towards „loss of estate‟ and „funeral expenses‟ @ Rs. 15,000/-
under each head, in terms of Pranay Sethi (Supra).
7. The amount payable to the claimant is as under:-
S.No. Particulars Amount
1. Loss of dependency Rs. 12,64,864/-
[Rs. 11,154/- (minimum wage) x 12
(months) x 18 (multiplier) x 140/100
(loss of future prospects) x 50/100
(1/2 deduction) = Rs. 16,86,485/- less
Rs. 4,21,621/- (25% contributory
negligence)]
2. Loss of consortium Rs. 80,000/-
[Rs. 40,000/- x 2 (claimants)]
3. Loss of love and affection Rs. 1,00,000/-
[Rs. 50,000/- x 2 (claimants)]
4. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/-
5. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
TOTAL Rs. 14,74,864/-
8. Let the enhanced amount of Rs. 8,21,491/-, alongwith interest @ 9%
from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till its realization, be deposited
by the insurance company before the learned Tribunal, within three weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order, to be released to the
beneficiary of the Award, in terms of the scheme of disbursement specified
therein.
9. The appeal stands disposed-off in the above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
OCTOBER 18, 2019
RW
