Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 634 (DEL)

Rajni Devi v. Dinesh Kumar Somani

2014-02-24

SURESH KAIT

body2014
Judgment : Suresh Kait, J. (Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 14.07.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.20,68,259/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the notice under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC was given by the Insurance Company. 2. Vide the present appeal, the appellants/claimants are seeking enhancement of the compensation amount as noted above. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants argued that PW2, Sh.Bhogender Jha, official of the department where deceased was working, has proved the salary slips of the deceased for the months of June, 2010 and July, 2010 as Ex.PW2/7 and PW2/8 respectively, wherein net salary of the deceased has been shown as Rs.15,798/-, which includes conveyance allowance of Rs.3,195/-. He submitted that while assessing the salary of the deceased, the learned Tribunal deducted the said conveyance allowance and accordingly taken the salary of the deceased as Rs.12,603/- per month. 4. Learned counsel further submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in considering that as per Ex.PW2/7 and PW2/8, gross salary of the deceased was Rs.15,798/-, rather it was his net salary after deducting a sum of Rs.702 towards PF subscription from the gross salary of Rs.16,500/-, as has been shown in the salary slip. He submitted that while assessing the monthly salary of the deceased, the learned Tribunal ought to have added aforesaid sum of Rs.702/- which is part of the salary. 5. Learned counsel also submitted that though the claimants have proved the employment and age of the deceased as he was 29 years old at the time of the accident, despite that the learned Tribunal has not added 50% of the actual income of the deceased towards future prospects. 6. To strengthen his arguments, the learned counsel has relied upon a case of Rajesh and Ors. Vs. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) SCALE 563, wherein the Full Bench of the Apex Court has held as under:- “11. 6. To strengthen his arguments, the learned counsel has relied upon a case of Rajesh and Ors. Vs. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) SCALE 563, wherein the Full Bench of the Apex Court has held as under:- “11. Since, the Court in Santosh Devi's case (supra) actually intended to follow the principle in the case of salaried persons as laid in Sarla Verma's case (supra) and to make it applicable also to the self-employed and persons on fixed wages, it is clarified that the increase in the case of those groups is not 30% always; it will also have a reference to the age. In other words, in the case of self-employed or persons with fixed wages, in case, the deceased victim was below 40 years, there must be an addition of 50% to the actual income of the deceased while computing future prospects. Needless to say that the actual income should be income after paying the tax, if any. Addition should be 30% in case the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years.” 12. In Sarla Verma's case (supra), it has been stated that in the case of those above 50 years, there shall be no addition. Having regard to the fact that in the case of those self-employed or on fixed wages, where there is normally no age of superannuation, we are of the view that it will only be just and equitable to provide an addition of 15% in the case where the victim is between the age group of 50 to 60 years so as to make the compensation just, equitable, fair and reasonable. There shall normally be no addition thereafter. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2/Insurance Company has fairly conceded that the deduction of aforenoted sum of Rs.702/- towards PF subscription from the salary of the deceased is incorrect and the same should have been added in the income of the deceased. 8. So far as the issue of future prospects is concerned, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company submitted that since deceased was not in permanent job, therefore, the learned Tribunal keeping in mind the dictum of Sarla Verma & Ors.Vs. DTC & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC121, which has been further affirmed by the Full Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC121, which has been further affirmed by the Full Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr. delivered in Civil Appeal No. 4646 of 2009 on 02.04.2013, has not added any amount in the actual income of the deceased towards future prospects. 9. As regards the issue of salary is concerned, keeping in view the submissions of both the counsels and material placed on record, monthly salary of the deceased comes to be Rs.13,305/- (Rs.12,603/- + Rs.702/-). 10. The issue of future prospects has been considered by this Court in the case bearing MAC. APP. No.846/2011 titled as ‘ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Angrej Singh & Ors.’, decided on 30.09.2013, wherein relying upon the dictum of Rajesh & Ors. (supra), this Court added 50% of the actual income of the deceased towards future prospects. 11. Therefore, keeping in view the settled position of law and that the deceased was aged 29 years at the time of the accident, I grant 50% of the actual income of the deceased towards future prospects. 12. In view of the above discussion, the compensation amount comes as under: Sl. No. Heads of Compensation Compensation granted by ld. Tribunal Compensation granted by this Court 1. Loss of dependency Rs.19,28,259/- Rs.30,53,497.5 2. For funeral expenses Rs. 25,000/- Rs. 25,000/- 3. Loss of love and affection Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 1,00,000/- 4. Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- 5. Loss to estate Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- TOTAL Rs.20,68,259/- Rs.31,93,497.5 Accordingly, the total compensation amount is assessed as Rs.31,93,497.5. 13. Resultantly, the enhanced compensation amount comes to Rs.11,25,238.5 (Rs.31,93,497.5 - Rs.20,68,259). The same is rounded off to Rs.11,25,240/-. 14. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization of the amount. 15. Accordingly, the respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with upto date interest accrued thereon with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of five weeks from today, failing which, appellants/claimants shall be entitled for penal interest @ 12% per annum on account of delayed payment. 16. On deposit, the Registrar General is directed to release the same in favour of the appellants/claimants proportionally in terms of the award dated 14.07.2011 passed by the learned Tribunal. 17. 16. On deposit, the Registrar General is directed to release the same in favour of the appellants/claimants proportionally in terms of the award dated 14.07.2011 passed by the learned Tribunal. 17. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed.