Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others – Appellants
Versus
Kishan Lal Sharma and Others – Respondents
MAC. APP. Nos. 1046 of 2016, 748 of 2017
Decided On : 01-11-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Brijesh Bagga.
For the Respondents: Ravi Sabharwal, Brijesh Bagga.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the appropriate assessment of income and application of multipliers for compensation in cases of awarding compensation for loss of dependency and non-pecuniary compensation.
Headnote:
Compensation - Award of Compensation - MAC. APP. No. 1046/2016 and MAC. APP. No. 748/2017 - Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Fact of the Case:
The appeals impugn the award of compensation dated 17.08.2019 passed by the learned MACT in Suit No. 115/15. The deceased, a qualified computer engineer, had his annual earning and loss of dependency calculated. The insurance company contested the assessment of the deceased's income and the application of multipliers for compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the assessment of the deceased's income and the application of multipliers for compensation were appropriate. It also ordered the deduction of a personal accident policy amount from the awarded compensation and granted non-pecuniary compensation to the claimants for loss of love and affection, loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses.
Issues: Assessment of the deceased's income, application of multipliers for compensation, deduction of personal accident policy amount, and entitlement to non-pecuniary compensation for various losses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the assessment of the deceased's income, the application of multipliers for compensation, and the entitlement to non-pecuniary compensation as per relevant legal provisions and precedents.
Final Decision: The appeals were disposed-off with the court upholding the assessment of the deceased's income, the application of multipliers for compensation, and granting non-pecuniary compensation to the claimants for various losses.
JUDGMENT :
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
C.M. APPL. No. 47433/2019 in MAC. APP. No. 1046/2016 and C.M. APPL. NO. 47437/2019 in MAC. APP. No. 748/2017
1. Issue notice.
2. The learned counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of the non-applicant- insurance company.
3. These applications seek early hearing of the appeals. For the reasons mentioned in the application, they are allowed.
4. The applications stand disposed-off.
MAC. APP. No. 1046/2016 and MAC. APP. No. 748/2017
5. At joint request, the appeals are taken up for disposal.
6. These appeals impugn the award of compensation dated 17.08.2019 passed by the learned MACT in Suit No. 115/15 on the ground that the deceased was a 24 year old qualified computer engineer. He was working as a professional in a private company at a salary of Rs. 21,000/-. Nevertheless, his revenue for the year was shown to be about Rs. 3,00,000/-. Accordingly, Rs. 3,20,357/- was taken as the annual earning and 50% of the same was deducted towards his personal expenses as only the parents were considered as the financial dependants; 50% was added towards loss of future prospects and thus, the loss of dependency was so calculated.
7. The learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the income was never proven, therefore, assumption of Rs. 3,20,357/- as the annual income is erroneous.
8. The Court would note that the deceased was a qualified computer engineer, he had already earned Rs. 21,000/- from earlier company and the other monies which were credited into his account were through NEFT transfers. PW-1 the mother of the deceased had deposed that he was rendering services in the computer industry as per his qualification and the said revenue was generated as a result of his skills, these transactions would ordinarily be from corporate entities and the same could have been verified.
9. The Court is of the view that there is no error in having taken the said amount as the bank statement was available to the insurer during the trial proceedings and nothing adverse has come on record to show that the monies did not come from corporate entities or that they were from other sources. In the circumstances, the assessment of the learned Tribunal that the said monies were from professional sources cannot be flawed.
10. The Court would further note that the multiplier on the basis of the parents has been taken into consideration instead the multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased. Accordingly, the multiplier of 18 would be applicable.
11. The learned counsel for the insurance company states that the deceased had a personal accident policy under which Rs. 2,00,000/- was paid to the claimants and the said amount ought to have been deducted from the awarded amount in view of the dicta of the Supreme Court in Helen C. Rebello and Others vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Another, (1991) 1 SCC 90. The learned counsel for the respondents readily agrees that Rs. 2,00,000/- may be deducted from the said amount. It is ordered to be deducted.
12. The Court would note that there are three claimants, therefore, each of the claimants would be entitled to non-pecuniary compensation for loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, be it filial or fraternal. While the sister may, in the present circumstances, not be dependant upon the deceased, nevertheless, she has lost a brother, his company and his love and affection. Therefore, she too would be entitled to compensation of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium in terms of the dicta of the Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and Others. It is so granted. 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 the dicta of the Supreme Court in National Insurance
