MRS. MUSTARI BEGUM vs. NEHAL & ORS.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

rd
Decided on: 3 February, 2012

+ MAC APP. 656/2011

MRS. MUSTARI BEGUM ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava, Adv.


versus


NEHAL & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Adv.
for R-3.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

J U D G M E N T


G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of ` 3,20,660/-
awarded for the death of Syed Khalikuk, who was aged 30 years
at the time of the accident.
2. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal it was claimed that
`
the deceased was a graduate and was earning 5,500/- per
month. In the absence of any proof of income and the
educational qualification, the Claims Tribunal took the
minimum wages of an unskilled worker i.e. ` 3,470/- as on
MAC APP 656/2011 Page 1 of 4


16.02.2007, deducted 50% towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased (he being a bachelor) and computed
the loss of dependency as ` 2,70,660/- on applying the
multiplier of ‘13’ as per the age of the Appellant (the deceased’s
mother).
3. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the
Appellant has not been able to obtain the certificate regarding
the deceased’s educational qualification and, therefore, does not
dispute taking minimum wages of an unskilled worker to
compute the loss of dependency. It is urged that the deceased
was a young boy of 30 years and an addition of 50% ought to
have been made in the minimum wages to compute the loss of
dependency.
4. In National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Renu Devi & Ors., III
(2008) ACC 134, this Court held that the increase in the
minimum wages is not on account of promotion of an unskilled
worker or on account of advancement in his career but the same
is due to increase in the price index and cost of living. It has
also to be borne in mind that the minimum wages are revised
not only to meet the inflation but also to improve the standard
of living of the lowest paid workers and to give them benefit of
growth in GDP.
5. Similar view was taken by this Court in Narinder Bishal & Anr.
v. Rambir Singh & Ors., 2009 ACJ 1881; UPSRTC v. Munni
MAC APP 656/2011 Page 2 of 4


Devi, IV (2009) ACC 879; and Vinod Kumar Bansal v. Ranbir
Singh & Ors., 2011 ACJ 1672 (Delhi).
6. A perusal of the Notifications issued under the Minimum
Wages Act would show that the minimum wages of an
unskilled worker were revised from ` 3470/- as on 1.02.2007 to
` 6,422/- on 01.04.2011. Thus, it has to be noticed that there
was an increase of more than 100% in the minimum wages in
just four years. This was not on account of inflation but to
provide a better standard of living to the lowest paid workers.
7. Thus, the Appellants were entitled to addition of 50% in the
income on account of indexation and increase in minimum
wages to provide better standard of living.
8. The revised loss of dependency works out to be ` 4,05,990/- ( `
3,470/- + 50% ÷ 2 x 12 x 13 = 4,05,990/-).
9. The overall revised compensation is tabulated hereunder: -

MAC APP 656/2011 Page 3 of 4

10. The enhanced compensation of ` 1,40,330/- shall carry interest
@ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the
date of the deposit. Respondent No.3 the New India Assurance
Company Ltd. is directed to deposit the award amount in UCO
Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi.
11. 20% of the enhanced amount along with proportionate interest
shall be released to the Appellant forthwith. Rest of the 80%
amount along with interest shall be held equally in two Fixed
Deposits for a period of two years and four years respectively.

12. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
13. No costs.



(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 03, 2012
hs
MAC APP 656/2011 Page 4 of 4