$~59

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Decided on: 15.12.2025

+ MAC.APP. 625/2015

BIMLA DEVI & ORS .....Appellants

Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.

versus

NARENDER YADAV & ORS (NATIONAL INSURANCE CO

LTD) .....Respondent

Through: Ms. Archana Gaur and Ms.

Ridhima Gaur, Advocate for NIC.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

PRATEEK JALAN, J. (ORAL)

1. The appellants, who were the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [“the Tribunal”], have preferred the present appeal against an award dated 09.04.2015, passed in MACT No. 250/2012, arising out of a fatal accident resulting in the death of Mr. Dushyant Kumar. They seek enhancement of the compensation granted to them by the impugned award, which was in the sum of Rs.12,52,779/- alongwith

interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

FACTS

2. The facts, as stated in the impugned award, are that on 19.09.2012 at about 10:00 PM, the deceased was riding a scooty alongwith one – Ms. Payal Srivastava, near Anand Vihar, when the scooty was struck by a Heavy Goods Vehicle [“HGV”] container bearing registration No. HR- 38J-6095. The occupants of the scooty were dragged for some distance, sustaining crush injuries. They were taken to Dr. Hedgewar Hospital,

where they were declared “Brought Dead”.

3. FIR No. 259/12, under Sections 279/304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was registered at PS Anand Vihar against the driver of the HGV [respondent No.1 herein], and a chargesheet dated 08.12.2014 was subsequently filed.

4. Two separate claim petitions were filed before the Tribunal arising out of the same accident, being MACT No. 249/12 relating to the death of Ms. Payal Srivastava, and MACT No. 250/12 relating to the death of Mr. Dushyant Kumar. The present appeal is against the award passed in MACT No. 250/12. The claimants before the Tribunal, who are the appellants herein, are the parents and two younger brothers of the deceased, while the driver, owner and insurer of the offending HGV were impleaded as respondents before the Tribunal, and are arrayed as respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the present appeal, respectively.

5. The Tribunal returned a finding in favour of the appellants, holding that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1, and awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.12,52,779/-, alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum, under following heads:

S.No. Heads Amount

1. Loss of dependency Rs.11,17,779.00 2. Loss of Love and affection Rs. 1,00,000.00 3. Funeral Expenses Rs. 25,000.00 4. Loss of Estate Rs. 10,000.00 Total Rs. 12,52,779.00

4. I have heard Mr. Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants, and Ms. Archana Gaur, learned counsel for respondent No.3 – National Insurance Co. Ltd. [“Insurance Company”].

5. Mr. Gupta seeks enhancement of the award on the following grounds:

a) While determining the income of the deceased, the Tribunal erred in taking the income for the assessment year 2012-13 from the Income Tax Returns [“ITRs”] as Rs.1,82,210/-, whereas the ITRs reflect gross income of Rs.2,21,211/-, which was subjected to deductions of Rs.39,000/-, which was wrongly excluded.

b) The Tribunal failed to add 40% towards future prospects, to the income of the deceased.

c) The Tribunal erroneously applied a multiplier of 13 based on the age of the mother of the deceased, whereas the appropriate multiplier, having regard to the age of the deceased, ought to have been 18.

d) The Tribunal incorrectly deducted 50% from the deceased’s income towards personal expenses, by treating the mother as the sole dependant, ignoring the evidence showing that the father and two brothers of the deceased were also dependent on him.

6. Per contra, Ms. Gaur supports the computation of loss of dependency in the impugned award, and further submits that the non- pecuniary heads of compensation require re-computation, in accordance with the principles laid down in the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi,