Back
2018 Supreme(Del) 448
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
J.R. MIDHA, J.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mahima Singh & Ors. – Respondents
MAC. APP 841 of 2017
Decided On : 09-02-2018
For the Appellant : Mr. L.K. Tyagi
For the Respondents: Ms. Chandrani Prasad and Mr. Tarun
The judgment established the principle of contributory negligence in motor vehicle accidents and provided guidance on determining compensation based on evidence of income and personal expenses.
Headnote:
Contributory Negligence - Motor Vehicle Accident - Sections 279/338/304-A IPC - Rule 23 of Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 - Shrimanti v. Krishna Deva Madiwal, 2005 ACJ 350 - Bharti Axa Gen Ins Co. Ltd. v. Fareeda, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 12600 - National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1270
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the compensation awarded to the respondents due to a motor vehicle accident resulting in the death of Anil Singh and Jitu. The appellant claimed contributory negligence and disputed the deceased's income and personal expenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the offending vehicle negligent but also held the deceased contributory negligent for not maintaining a safe distance. It ruled on the evidence of the deceased's income and personal expenses, reducing the compensation amount due to contributory negligence and excessive awards under non-pecuniary heads.
Issues: Contributory negligence, deceased's income and personal expenses, and excessive compensation under non-pecuniary heads.
Ratio Decidendi: The deceased was held contributory negligent based on the Rules of the Road Regulations and legal precedents. The court also considered evidence of the deceased's income and personal expenses, applying principles from relevant case law to determine the compensation amount.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the compensation amount was reduced from Rs.54,87,500 to Rs.40,00,000 along with interest at 9% per annum.
1. The appellant has challenged the award dated 18th July, 2017 whereby compensation of Rs.54,87,500/- has been awarded to respondent No.1 to 3.
2. On 29th September, 2015, late Anil Singh was going in car bearing No. DL-3CAQ-6360 to Kanpur. When the car reached Sarai Tiraha on National Highway-2, a gas tanker bearing No. HR-55M-0679 going ahead of the car, applied sudden breaks due to which the car collided with the tanker from behind which resulted in the death of Anil Singh and Jitu. The police registered FIR No. 518/2015, P.S. Civil Lines, District Ritawa under Sections 279/338/304-A IPC against the driver of the tanker. Anil Singh was survived by his widow, parents and minor daughter who filed the application for compensation before the Claims Tribunal.
3. The deceased was aged 38 years at the time of death. The deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by working as a supervisor with Logico Marketing apart from income of Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- from property dealing business.
4. The Claims Tribunal took the income of deceased as Rs.25,000/-per month, added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/4 towards his personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 15 to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.50,62,500/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/-towards loss of love and affection, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of guidance to minor child, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.1,00,000/-towards loss of estate and Rs.25,000/-towards funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is Rs.54,87,500/-.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing that the deceased was contributory negligent and, therefore, the compensation awarded is liable to be reduced on account of contributory negligence. It is further submitted that the income of the deceased has not been proved and, therefore, the minimum wages be taken into consideration. It is further submitted that the personal expenses of the deceased be reduced from 1/4th to 1/3rd and the compensation under the heads of loss of love and affection, loss of consortium and loss of estate be reduced.
6. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 submits that deceased was not contributory negligent. It is further submitted that the police has registered the criminal case of negligence against the driver of the gas tanker who was negligent as he suddenly stopped the tanker on a National Highway. It is further submitted that no evidence has been led by the driver of the offending vehicle or the insurance company to rebut the same. Reliance is placed on Mukhopadhya v. Gopala Gowda, AIR 2014 SC 1052, Jiju Kuruvila v. Kunjujamma Mohan, 2013 ACJ 2141 (SC), UP Roadways v. Santosh Khurana in FAO No. 81/1994 decided on 15th July, 2015, Prabandhak, UP Rajya Sadak Parivahan Nigam v. Rabia Begum, 2015 ACJ 1492 and National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pushpa Rana, 2008 (101) DRJ 645.
7. With respect to the income of the deceased, it is submitted that employer of the deceased G.P. Singh, Proprietor of Logico Marketing came in the witness box and deposed that the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month besides incentives and perks. He further deposed that the deceased was also provided with car, fuel expenses, and mobile expenses along with the residential accommodation. G.P. Singh proved the salary certificate issued by him as Ex.PW2/2. G.P. Singh marked ‘Form for Verification of Tenant’ of Delhi Police as Mark ‘A’ in which the deceased along with his family were shown as tenants. The deceased was also earning Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per month from the property dealing business. Sushil Yadav, Proprietor of Sun Heights came in the witness box and deposed that the deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per month and deceased used to refer customers and was paid commission for the same. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 produced the photocopy of the ledger account of the employer showing payment of Rs.25,000/- per month to
