High CourtsSingle Bench

Saroj Khanijo and Others vs Ishika Berry and Others

Delhi High Court · Decided on 12 September 2013 · Citation: (2013) 09 DEL CK 0138

HON’BLE JUDGES
Suresh Kait, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
MAC. APP. 1001 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 510 words

Suresh Kait, J.—Instant appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the ld. Tribunal vide impugned order dated 19.07.2011. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that while granting the compensation of Rs. 13,10,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, ld. Tribunal has not granted future prospects as the deceased was 47 years of age on the date of accident.

2.

Ld. Counsel has relied upon a case of Rajesh and Others Vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, wherein the Apex Court has held as under:

Since the Court in Santosh Devi''s case (Supra) actually intended to follow the principle in the case of salaries 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.

3.

On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondent / insurance company submits that future prospects can be granted only if the deceased is in a permanent job as has been considered in a case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , which has thereafter been affirmed by the Full Bench of Supreme Court in the case of Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr. delivered in Civil Appeal No. 4646 of 2009 on 02.04.2013.

4.

I am conscious that recent judgment of Full Bench is Rajesh Kumar v. Rajbir (Supra). Therefore, keeping in view the dictum of the Apex Court, I grant 30% future prospects in view the age of the deceased as the deceased was 47 years of age on the date of accident, i.e., 17.09.2008.

5.

Accordingly, the compensation comes as under:

6.

Thus the enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 3,51,000/-, i.e., (Rs. 16,61,000 - Rs. 13,10,000).

7.

On the issue of increase of interest, keeping in view the date of accident, i.e., 17.09.2008, I am of the considered opinion, that ld. Tribunal has rightly granted interest @ 7.5%. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with.

8.

Consequently, the enhanced amount of Rs. 3,51,000/- shall be deposited with the Registrar General of this court within five weeks from today.

9.

Needless to state that the said amount shall also carry interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.

10.

On deposit, the Registrar General is further directed to release the enhanced compensation in favour of the appellants on taking steps. Instant appeal stands allowed in view of the above terms.