Delhi High Court
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sunmaya Gurung & Ors on 18 February, 2020
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 18th February, 2020
+ MAC.APP. 49/2020 & CM APPL.4267/2020
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.J.P.N. Shahi, Mr.Navdeep Singh,
Advocates
versus
SUNMAYA GURUNG & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Roshan Lal Goel, Ms.Anju Gupta,
Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal
whereby compensation of Rs.61,04,000/- has been awarded to respondents
No.1 to 3. The appellant seeks reduction of the award amount.
2. On 04th February, 2017, Gaurav Chauhan was driving car No. DL-10-
CD-6496 which met with an accident with offending vehicle bearing
No.HR-65U-4049 on NH 8 at about 2.30 A.M. The accident resulted in the
death of Gaurav Chauhan who was aged 31 years and was survived by his
widow and parents. The deceased was a mechanical engineer earning
Rs.37,800/- per month.
3. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.37,800/-
per month, added 40% towards future prospects, deducted 1/3rd towards
personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 16 to compute the loss of
dependency as Rs.67,73,760/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.60,000/-
towards loss of love and affection, Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium,
Rs.15,000/- towards loss to estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses.
The Claims Tribunal deducted Rs.8 lakhs towards accident insurance. Total
compensation awarded is Rs.61,04,000/-.
4. Learned Counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the hearing that
the deceased was contributory negligent and, therefore, the compensation is
liable to be reduced on that account. It is submitted that the deceased hit the
stationary vehicle from behind.
5. Learned counsel for the claimants urged at the time of the hearing that
the deceased was not contributory negligent and the finding of negligence of
the offending vehicle is justified.
6. This Court is of the view that the deceased was contributory
negligent, inasmuch as the deceased hit stationary offending vehicle from
behind and therefore, compensation is liable to be reduced on account of the
contributory negligence.
7. Learned counsel for the claimants, on instructions from the claimants
present in Court, submits that the claimants are entitled to interest of more
than Rs.14 lakhs from the date of the institution and the claimants have no
objection to give up the interest on the awarded amount on account of the
contributory negligence.
8. This Court is satisfied that lump sum compensation of Rs.60 lakhs to
the claimants is fair and reasonable. The award amount beyond Rs.60 lakh
along with interest awarded by the Claims Tribunal is hereby adjusted on
account of the contributory negligence of the deceased.
9. The appeal is allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is reduced to lump sum amount of Rs. 60 lakh without interest.
However, if the amount is not deposited within three weeks by the appellant,
it shall carry interest @ 9% from the date of this judgment.
10. The appellant is directed to deposit Rs. 60 lakh with the Claims
Tribunal within three weeks whereupon the Claims Tribunal shall disburse
the same to the claimants in terms of the award. The share of the claimants
in Rs.60 lakhs would be as under:
(i) Respondent No.1 Rs.30 lakhs
(ii) Respondent No.2 Rs.10 lakhs
(iii) Respondent No.3 Rs.20 lakhs
11. The Claims Tribunal shall release 10% amount to respective
respondents and the balance amount be kept in FDRs in terms of the award.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that 20% amount be released to
the parents of the deceased for the marriage of their daughter, Pooja
Chauhan. Liberty is given to respondent to approach the Claims Tribunal
for release of further 10% whenever the marriage of the daughter is fixed.
The claimants shall approach the Claims Tribunal one month before the
marriage whereupon the Claims Tribunal shall release further 10% subject to
condition that the respondents shall file the affidavit with respect to the
solemnization of the marriage and the marriage photograph before the
Claims Tribunal within one month of the marriage.
12. The statutory amount be refunded back to the appellant after the
deposit of the award amount. The appellant shall file the proof of deposit of
the award amount whereupon the Registry shall refund the statutory amount
to the appellant. The appellant shall also furnish the proof of deposit to
learned counsel for the claimants.
13. The pending application is also disposed of.
14. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsel for the parties under
the signature of the Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
FEBRUARY 18, 2020
dk
