MAC.APP. 361/2013

Page 1 of 5

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on : 26.08.2022

Pronounced on: 23 .09.2022

+

MAC.APP. 361/2013

KANTI DEVI & ORS

..... Appellants

Through:

Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate

versus

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

& ORS

...... Respondents

Through:

Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH

J U D G M E N T

GAURANG KANTH, J.

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award

dated 30.03.2012 passed by the Court of learned Presiding

Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma

Courts, Delhi.

2.

By way of impugned Award dated 30.03.2012 the learned

Claims Tribunal Awarded a compensation of Rs. 9,83,660/-

with interest @ 7.5 % per annum from the date of filing of the

claim petition till realization of the amount and directed the

Insurance Company to deposit the entire awarded amount

before the Tribunal within a period of one month.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003959

MAC.APP. 361/2013

Page 2 of 5

SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANTS

3.

Mr. S. N. Parashar learned counsel for the Appellant restricted

his arguments on quantum of compensation awarded by the

learned Claims Tribunal and contended that in terms of dicta of

Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs

Pranay Sethi & Ors reported as 2017 AIR (SC) 5157,

compensation is to be paid under the head ‘Future Prospects’

by adding 25% of the assessed income of the deceased.

Learned counsel, while placing reliance on Pranay Sethi

(supra) case, further contended that compensation under the

‘Loss of Consortium’ ‘Loss of Estate’ and ‘Loss of Funeral

Expenses’ also needs to be modified/enhanced. Learned

counsel fairly concedes that in terms of judgment of Pranay

Sethi (Supra),compensation under the head ‘Love and

Affection.’ has to be deducted.

SUBMISSION OF THE RESPONDENTS

4.

Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate learned counsel appearing on

behalf of respondent No. 1 contended that the impugned Award

passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is based on cogent,

consistent and reliable evidences and no interference in the

impugned Award is called for by this Court.

COURT’S REASONING

5.

The arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties are

purely legal and based on the law settled by the Hon’ble Apex

Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra).

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003959

MAC.APP. 361/2013

Page 3 of 5

6.

From the perusal of the judgment of Pranay Sethi (Supra), it is

emphatically clear that for the conventional heads, namely,

‘Loss of Estate’, Loss of Consortium’ and ‘Funeral Expenses’

the amount of compensation is fixed as Rs. 15,000/-, Rs.

40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/-, respectively with an increase of 10%

after a period of 3 years. Further, since the deceased was aged

44 years at the time of alleged incident an addition of 25% of

the established income should be granted under the head

‘Future Prospects’. With regard to deduction to be made

towards ‘Personal and Living Expenses’, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Pranay Sethi (Supra) upholds the deduction

ascertained in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs DTC & Anr.

reported as (2009) 6 SCC 121.

7.

It is borne out from the records that deceased was survived of

seven legal representatives. However, the learned Claims

Tribunal, considered only 4 of them are dependent (excluding

the 2 married daughters and major son) of the deceased.

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid judgments deduction

towards personal and living expenses of the deceased should be

one-fourth (1/4^th).

8.

Regarding the consortium to be granted in the present case, this

Court notes that the learned Claims Tribunal has treated only 4

of the legal representatives as dependent of the deceased.

According to the learned