Simran And Ors vs National Insurance Co Ltd And Ors
- Court
- Delhi High Court
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
st
% Date of decision: 31 July 2026
# CNR No. DLHC016015602015
+ MAC.APP. 880/2015
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD .....Appellant
Through: Ms. Suman Bagg & Ms. Mouli
Sharma, Advocates
versus
SHRI THAN SINGH & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Manoj Loomba, Mr. Manish
Loomba Mr. Vansh Chawla & Mr.
Vishant Prakash, Advocates for
Respondent no.1
Mr. Jyotindera Kumar and Mr.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocates for
Respondent no.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
JUDGMENT
ANISH DAYAL, J (ORAL)
1. This appeal has been filed by the insurance company seeking
reduction of the compensation awarded by the MACT, Dwarka Courts,
st
vide impugned award dated 21 September 2015 in MACT No.
491/13/14, awarding compensation of Rs. 18,47,608/- with interest @
10%.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 1 of 7
th
2. The accident in question occurred on 05 April 2012, in which the
claimant, Than Singh , sustained grievous injuries when his motorcycle
was hit by a DTC bus allegedly being driven rashly and negligently by
Mukesh Kumar , Respondent No. 1. The front wheel of the bus crushed
his right leg, resulting in a fracture of the right shaft of femur and 42%
permanent disability.
3. Ms. Mouli Sharma , counsel for the insurance company, challenges
the impugned award on three counts:
i. There was contributory negligence on the part of the injured
claimant, as the accident involved a head-on collision.
ii. The income of the injured claimant has not been proved to be
Rs.20,000/- per month. Moreover, it is claimed that he was
employed as a Junior Engineer (‘ J.E’ .) with a contracting firm,
M/s. Pawan Kumar . However, the record shows that he held only
a Bachelor of Arts degree, which throws suspicion on the nature of
the job, which has been proposed. Further, even if the monthly
income of Rs.20,000/- is accepted, a sum of Rs.5,000/- ought to
have been deducted towards conveyance and telephone expenses.
iii. The injured claimant was 28 years of age at the time of the
accident and was not in a permanent job. Therefore, future
prospects ought to have been granted at 40%, instead of 50%.
On the issue of contributory negligence
4. A perusal of the site plan, Ex. PW1/11 , would show that the
motorcyclist was coming from Rawta Mor and going towards Village
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 2 of 7
Chandu , Haryana. It can also be seen that the road was curved at that
point. The point of impact, marked as Point ‘A’ in the site plan, was
situated 9 feet from the left side of the road. Since the width of the road
was 25 feet, the injured-claimant was well within the left half of the
carriageway. Accordingly, it cannot be argued that there could be
contributory negligence on the part of the injured-claimant, considering
that he was very well within the left part of the road and the DTC bus
appears to have failed to negotiate the S-shaped curve properly, which
would have resulted in the collision. In fact, Point ‘B’ in the site plan
indicates the location where the motorcycle was finally found after the
collision. The site map for reference is extracted as under:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 3 of 7
On issue of quantum
5. Mr. Manoj Loomba , counsel for the claimant, argues that the
testimony of PW4 is sufficient to prove the income, which was being
received by the injured-claimant, and has been rightly relied upon by the
MACT. He further submits that the appointment letter has been exhibited
as Ex. PW1/8 , and the corresponding vouchers have also been placed on
record.
6. The Court has perused the salary slips, the attendance registers,
th
and the appointment letter dated 20 October 2011, all of which formed
part of the record before MACT.
7. The attendance register includes the name of the injured-claimant,
Than Singh . The appointment letter shows that the injured-claimant was
appointed on a monthly remuneration of Rs.20,000/-, whereby the basic
salary was Rs. 15,000/-, a conveyance allowance of Rs.3,000/-, and a
telephone allowance of Rs.2,000/-. It is further stated that he was on
probation for 6 months and thereafter, upon successful completion, his
salary would be Rs.28,000/- per month.
8. In this view of the matter, the Court finds no infirmity in the
assessment of notional income by the MACT, as the income of the
injured claimant can be proved through the testimony of PW4 ,
accountant of the firm where he was employed, which is corroborated by
the documentary evidence placed on record, including the voucher
issued by M/s Pawan Kumar to the injured-claimant.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 4 of 7
9. As regards the contention of Ms. Sharma that the claimant could
not have been employed as a J.E. despite possessing only a Bachelor of
Arts degree, the same need not be required to be considered. The
terminology of the J.E. may be a loose terminology, which might have
been used by the private contractor. It is common for private contractors
to employ graduates with experience in civil contract work (even though
not strictly within the scope of engineering). Therefore, it may have been
given the epithet of a Junior Engineer for the purposes of their agency.
Accordingly, the income adopted by the MACT is sustained.
10. Considering that the injured-claimant was 28 years old and did not
have a permanent job, future prospects ought to be computed at 40 %,
instead of 50 %, in terms of the law laid down in National Insurance
Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680.
11. Accordingly, revised compensation will be as under:
Sr.
No.
Heads Awarded by the
Awarded by
Tribunal
this Court
PECUNIARY LOSS
1. Expenditure on Medical Bills
and medical treatment (A)
Rs. 3,67,608/- Rs. 3,67,608/-
2. Expenditure on conveyance,
special diet and (B)
Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 20,000/-
3 Attendant Charges [C] Rs. 36,000/- Rs. 36,000/-
4. Income of injured per
month(E)
Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 20,000/-
5. Loss of Income (C) [6
months]
Rs. 1,20,000/- Rs. 1,20,000/-
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 5 of 7
6. Add: Future prospects (F) 50% 40% of Rs. 20,000/- =
Rs. 8,000/-
7. Multiplier (G) 17 17
8. Functional disability (H) 20% 20%
9. Loss of future income/future
earnings [(E+F) x 12 x G x
H] = (I)
Rs.12,24,000/- Rs. 11,42,400/-
NON- PECUNIARY LOSS
10. Pain and suffering (J) Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 50,000/-
11. Loss of disfigurement,
depression and mental state
and loss of amenities (K)
Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 30,000/-
12. Total compensation (A + B +
C + I+ J+ K) = L
Rs. 18,47,608/- Rs. 17,66,008/-
13. Interest awarded 9% per annum 9% per annum
14. Reduced Compensation Rs. 81,600/-
12. Accordingly, the compensation is reduced by Rs. 81,600/-.
th
13. Vide order dated 20 November 2015, this Court directed the
appellant/Insurance Company to deposit the entire awarded
compensation with the Registrar General of this Court.
14. Accordingly, the excess compensation (original compensation -
revised compensation) along with accrued interest thereon be refunded to
the insurance company.
15. The balance amount pending in the FDR’s be liquidated and be
released to the injured-claimant/respondent no.1 as lump sum,
considering it relates to 2012 accident.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 6 of 7
16. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
17. Pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous.
18. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
19. Statutory deposit, if any, shall be refunded to appellant/Insurance
Company, only if the order of deposit has been complied with.
20. Judgment be uploaded on the website of this Court.
(ANISH DAYAL)
JUDGE
JULY 31, 2026/sm/ bp
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:MANISH KUMAR
Signing Date:06.08.2026
18:18:42
MAC.APP. 880/2015 Page 7 of 7