Delhi High Court
Nandan Mukherjee vs Mohd Rafiq And Ors on 20 January, 2025
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~57
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 20th January, 2025
+ MAC.APP. 126/2013 & CM APPL. 3268/2025
NANDAN MUKHERJEE
S/o Shri D.C. Mukherjee,
R/o 105-A, LIG DDA Flats, Motia Khan,
Paharganj, Delhi-110005 .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Animesh Kumar, Advocate
through VC.
versus
1. MOHD RAFIQ
S/o Shri Kalwa Qureshi,
R/o Village Athseni,
PS & Tehsil Garh Mukhteswar,
District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh .....Respondent No. 1
2. JAI PRAKASH
S/o Shri Ram Kishan,
R/o A-9, Kewal Park Extension,
Panchvati, Delhi .....Respondent No. 2
3. RELIANCE GENERAL INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
A-12, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate,
Mathura Road, New Delhi110044,
Through Mr. Sahil Gupta,
Sr. Manager - Legal Claims .....Respondent No. 3/Revisionist
Through: Mr. Rajeev M. Roy, Advocate for
R-3/Insurance Company through VC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. The present Review Petition under Section 114 read with Order
XLVII and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed
on behalf of the Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company seeking correction of
the error in Paragraph-24 of the Judgment dated 05.12.2024, wherein the
Multiplier of 16 has been taken even though the deceased was 39 years and
11 months old at the time of accident i.e., 15.07.2011 and the correct
Multiplier should have been 15.
2. Issue Notice.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the Non-Revisionist/Appellant
appearing on advance Notice, accepts Notice and submits that the Multiplier
of 16 has been rightly applied and the present Review Petition is liable to be
dismissed.
4. Submissions heard and record perused.
5. The assessment of Multiplier has been considered in Paragraph-24 of
the Impugned Order dated 05.12.2022. It was held as under:-
"(ii) Multiplier and Age: -
24. The Learned Tribunal has assessed the Age of the
injured/Appellant as 40 years on the basis of his date of Birth
mentioned in his PAN Card i.e. 14.08.1971 and thus, applied
the Multiplier of 15.
25. However, since he was about 39 years and 11 months on the
date of the accident. ie. 15.07. 2011, the correct multiplier of 16
would be applicable in light of the judgment of Sarla Verma v.
DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121."
6. The ground on which the present Review has been sought is that the
Multiplier of 16 has been taken even though the deceased was 39 years and
11 months old at the time of accident i.e., 15.07.2011 and the correct
Multiplier should have been 15.
7. There is a typographical error in mentioning the applicable Multiplier.
As per Sarla Verma vs. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121, a Multiplier of 15 is
applicable for the age group of 36-40 years. Thus, it is directed that the
amount for total compensation be calculated on the basis of Multiplier of
'15' as under: -
Rs. 2,32,750/- p.a. X 140/100 X 35/100 X 15 = Rs. 17,10,712.5/-
8. The total compensation is thus modified accordingly as under:
S. Heads Amount granted by the Amount Modified
No. Ld. Tribunal by this Court
1. Total Loss of Income Rs. 1,03,195/- Rs. 1,16,375/-
2. Medical Expenses Rs. 39,100/- (same) Rs. 39,100/- (same)
3. Future Medical Expenses Rs. 3,32,500/- Rs. 11,00,000/-
(Cost of Artificial Limb
and Maintenance)
4. Loss of Future Earning Rs. 10,82,500/- Rs. 17,10,712.5/-
Capacity
5. Special Diet and Rs. 18,000/- Rs. 30,000/-
Conveyance Charges
6. Pain and Suffering Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 2,00,000/-
7. Loss of Amenities Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 2,00,000/-
8. Loss of Enjoyment of life Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 1,00,000/- (same)
9. Disfigurement Nil Rs. 1,00,000/-
10. Loss of Marriage Nil Nil
Prospects
11. Attendant Charges Nil Rs. 1,00,000/-
12. Interest 9% 9% (same)
TOTAL Rs. 18,75,195/- Rs. 36,96,187.5
COMPENSATION Rounded off to Rs.
37,00,000/-
9. The modified awarded amount in the sum of Rs. 37,00,000/- along
with interest @ 9% per annum be deposited within three weeks.
10. With aforesaid modification of the Judgment dated 05.12.2024, the
present Review Petition is accordingly disposed of along with pending
Application.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE
JANUARY 20, 2025
S.Sharma
