High CourtsSingle Bench

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Pritam Singh & Ors

Delhi High Court · Decided on 27 November 2017 · Citation: (2017) 11 DEL CK 0187

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.K.Gauba, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
MAC. Appeal No. 892 Of 2012, 882 Of 2016
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

35 paragraphs · 671 words

R.K.Gauba, J

1.

By judgment dated 27.02.2012, the motor accident claims Tribunal (tribunal) decided accident claim case (Suit No.511/11) which had been instituted

on 02.09.2009 by the parents of deceased Vijender Singh (appellants in MAC APP.882/2016), they being first & second respondents in MAC

APP.892/2012 (collectively, the claimants), the death having occurred in a motor vehicular accident that had been caused on 07.06.2009 due to

negligent driving of tanker bearing registration No.HR-55D-7506, which was admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question with

Shriram General Insurance Company Limited (insurer), (appellant in MAC APP.892/2012).

2.

The tribunal granted compensation in the total sum of Rs.8,93,280/-, directing the insurer to pay with interest @ 7.5% per annum. However, on an

application of the insurance company, the said award was modified by order dated 12.04.2012 whereby compensation in the total sum of Rs.4,61,640/-

was awarded which included Rs.4,31,640/- on account of loss of dependency and Rs.10,000/- each towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss

of love and affection.

3.

The deceased was admittedly a bachelor, aged 21 years on the date of death. No clear proof as to his income was mustered and, thus, the tribunal

assumed Rs.4,360/- as the notional income, it being the minimum wages payable during the relevant period. It added 50% towards future prospects of

income, made deduction of one-half and applied the multiplier of 11, according to the age of the mother of the deceased while calculating the loss of

dependency.

4.

Both the insurer and the claimants are in appeal, the former taking exception to inclusion of future prospects to the extent of 50% and the latter

submitting that the multiplier should have been adopted as per the age of the deceased and that the non-pecuniary damages and rate of interest levied

are inadequate.

5.

The contentions of both sides are found to be correct. In view of the ruling of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court rendered on 31.10.2017

in SLP (C) 25590/2014, National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Or,s .and Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation &

Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, the multiplier of 18 will have to be applied having regard to the age of the deceased at the time of death and future prospects

will need to be restricted to 40%. Thus, the loss of dependency is re-calculated as (4360 x 140/100 ÷ 2 x 12 x 18] Rs.6,59,232/- rounded off to

Rs.6,60,000/-. In addition to this, Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and funeral expenses are added.

6.

Thus, the total compensation comes to (6,60,000/- + 15,000/- + 15,000/-) Rs.6,90,000/- (Rupees Six Lac and Ninety Thousand Only).

7.

The award is modified accordingly.

8.

Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of interest is increased to 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till

realization. [see judgment dated 22.02.2016 in MAC.APP. 165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta Devi & Ors.].

9.

By order dated 17.08.2012 read with order 08.02.2013 passed in MAC APP.892/2012, the insurance company had been directed to deposit the

entire awarded amount with upto date interest and out of the said deposit, fifty per cent (50%) was directed to be released to the claimants.

10.

Since the award stands increased, the entire balance lying in deposit shall now be released to the claimants in terms of the impugned award. The

enhanced portion of the award with corresponding interest shall be deposited by the insurance company with the tribunal within thirty days (30 days)

whereupon it shall be released to the second claimant Smt. Kripal Kaur (mother) only in the form of interest bearing fixed deposit receipt to be taken

out from a nationalized bank for a period of seven years with right to draw periodic interest.

11.

The statutory deposit shall be refunded to the insurer upon showing proof of satisfaction of award.

12.

Both the appeals stand disposed of in above terms.

13.

Pending applications also stand disposed of.