Nirmal Rani vs Harish Kumar

G. P. Mittal, J.—The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/- awarded for the death of Ram Prakash, who died in an accident which occurred on the night of 05-06.10.1991. The deceased was aged 38 years at the time of accident. He left behind his widow, two daughters and a son as his legal heirs. During inquiry before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal), it was claimed that deceased used to work as a street vendor and as a loader and was earning about Rs. 3,000/- per month.

PW-2 Raj Kumar testified that deceased used to do the work of loading and would earn between Rs. 1000-1500/- per month. The Claims Tribunal did not believe this income in the absence of any cogent evidence. Therefore, it took help of the minimum wages of a worker fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, deducted one third towards personal and living expenses and applied a multiplier of 13 to compute the loss of dependency as Rs. 93,000/-. The Claims Tribunal further awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 10,000/- towards Love and Affection to award an over all compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/-.

It is important to note that the cheque towards premium was dishonoured. The intimation of the dishonour of the cheque was, however, not given to the owner of the vehicle by the time of accident. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, while making the United India Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation granted it the right to recover the amount of compensation paid from the insured.

It may be noted that the Respondent No. 3 Insurance Company aggrieved by the fastening of the liability against it filed FAO No. 548/2001 which was dismissed by this Court by an order dated 19.03.2007. In this view of matter, the finding on negligence has become final between the parties.

Although PW-1, the deceased''s widow claimed the deceased''s income to be Rs. 3,000/- per month, which was stated to be Rs. 1,000/- -1,500/- per month by PW-2. In the absence of any reliable evidence, the Claims Tribunal rightly took the minimum wages as the deceased''s income. Since the number of dependents were four and the age of deceased was 38 years, the deduction towards personal and living expenses shall be one-fourth and the appropriate multiplier would be ''15'' in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121; applying the same loss of dependency comes to Rs. 1,20,285/- (891/- x 12 x 3/4 x15).

No compensation has been awarded towards Loss to Estate and Loss of Consortium. The compensation towards Loss of Love and Affection is also on the lower side. Considering that the accident took place in the year 1991, I would enhance the compensation award towards Loss of Love and Affection from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- and compensation towards funeral expenses from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 5,000/-. I further award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards Loss of Consortium and Rs. 5,000/- towards Loss to Estate.

The overall compensation is thus enhanced from Rs. 1,05,000/- to Rs. 1,60,285/-

The enhanced compensation of Rs. 55,285/- shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of the impugned judgment i.e. 09.08.2001. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from 10.08.2001 till its deposit with the UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi.

Since, this accident took place about 21 years back and all the three children have become major, out of the enhanced compensation, a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- each along with proportionate interest shall be payable to Appellants No. 2 to 4; rest of the amount along with proportionate interest shall be payable to the Appellant No. 1.

Respondent No. 3 United India Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount in the name of the Appellants within six weeks with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court and proof regarding the deposit shall be filed with the Registrar General of this Court with an intimation to the Counsel for the Appellant.

Since this accident, as stated above occurred about 21 years back, the enhanced amount of compensation shall be released to the Appellants forthwith on deposit. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.