Full Judgment Text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MAC. App. No. 139/2005
Judgment delivered on: October 03, 2007
Smt.Devki Devi ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.S.N. Parashar, Adv.
versus
Sh. Anil Gupta ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.A.K. Sharma, Adv. for
respondent No.1.
Mr.R.K. Tripathi, Adv. for
respondent No.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may
be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest? Yes
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. Oral:
*
The appellant in the present appeal seeks
enhancement in the award over and above the amount as already
awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.1,10,000/- towards loss of financial dependance besides a sum
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 1 of 5
of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium/non-pecuniary damages
with a further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and
thus a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- has been awarded in favour of the
appellant. The case involves a young child of 18 years who as per
the appellant was working as a labourer in some canteen. In the
absence of any evidence led by the appellant to prove his income
and due to the nature of the employment, the Tribunal has taken
the notional income of Rs.15,000/- into consideration as laid down
in the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. After deducting
rd
1/3 income of the deceased towards personal expenses and after
taking note of the age of the defendants, multiplier of 11 has been
applied and the Tribunal has arrived at the said figure of
Rs.1,10,000/-. The appellant in the present appeal is aggrieved
that the inflation and the increase in the price index has not been
taken into consideration by the Tribunal. Counsel appearing for
the appellant contends that accident had occurred on 6.9.2001
and the Second Schedule was inserted in the Motor Vehicles Act
by amending the Act of 1988 in the year 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994.
Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of
this Court in MAC. App. No.297/2005 in which the inflation and
increase in the cost of living index has been taken into
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 2 of 5
consideration.
Per contra, counsel for the respondent contends that
there is no illegality and perversity in the order passed by the
Tribunal and the appellant did not lead evidence to disclose the
nature of his employment. Counsel also contends that correct
multiplier of 11 after taking into consideration the age of the
defendants has been applied by the Tribunal.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In the Second Schedule the criteria for taking into
consideration the multiplier as well as the income of the
deceased, a formula was inserted in the year 1994 and thereafter
no revision has been made in the Second Schedule. In Sub Clause
(c) of Section 163-A, the legislature mandated that the Central
Government may keeping in view the cost of living from time to
time amend the Second Schedule by notification in the official
gazette. But, however, no such notification has been issued by
the Central Government even after a lapse of more than 12 years
from the date when the said Section 163-A and the Second
Schedule was brought on the statute of Motor Vehicles Act. Under
the Minimum Wages Act, the salary of Rs.1,382/- in the year 1994
was increased to Rs.2579/- in the year 2001 and Rs.3312/- as on
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 3 of 5
1.8.2006. The price index has also increased manifold due to the
inflation and as per the judgment of this Court in MAC. App.
297/2005, this Court has observed increase of at least 50% in the
minimum wages from the year 1997 to 2003. It is, thus, apparent
that the wages have increased almost double from the year 1994
till 2006 (the revision in the minimum wages is also based on the
price index).
In view of the said increase in the price index, I feel
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal by not taking into
consideration the increase in the price index is inappropriate. I do
not feel inclined to interfere with the multiplier of 11 years and
also the award of Rs.15,000/- made towards consortium/non-
pecuniary damages. The compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- as
granted by the Tribunal towards the loss of financial dependance
of the defendants shall now needs to be calculated on the basis of
double of the annual income as on the date of accident i.e.
rd
Rs.30,000/- and after deducting 1/3 of the sum towards personal
expenses of the deceased, the said amount would come to
Rs.20,000/- per annum and with the multiplier of 11 being
applicable in the present case, the total compensation towards
the loss of financial dependance would come to Rs.2,20,000/-.
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 4 of 5
Since the appellant has already received a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-,
therefore, the balance amount shall be paid by respondent No.3
insurer with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the
appeal.
With these directions, the appeal is disposed of.
October 03, 2007 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
ga
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 5 of 5
MAC. App. No. 139/2005
Judgment delivered on: October 03, 2007
Smt.Devki Devi ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.S.N. Parashar, Adv.
versus
Sh. Anil Gupta ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.A.K. Sharma, Adv. for
respondent No.1.
Mr.R.K. Tripathi, Adv. for
respondent No.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may
be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest? Yes
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. Oral:
*
The appellant in the present appeal seeks
enhancement in the award over and above the amount as already
awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.1,10,000/- towards loss of financial dependance besides a sum
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 1 of 5
of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium/non-pecuniary damages
with a further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and
thus a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- has been awarded in favour of the
appellant. The case involves a young child of 18 years who as per
the appellant was working as a labourer in some canteen. In the
absence of any evidence led by the appellant to prove his income
and due to the nature of the employment, the Tribunal has taken
the notional income of Rs.15,000/- into consideration as laid down
in the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. After deducting
rd
1/3 income of the deceased towards personal expenses and after
taking note of the age of the defendants, multiplier of 11 has been
applied and the Tribunal has arrived at the said figure of
Rs.1,10,000/-. The appellant in the present appeal is aggrieved
that the inflation and the increase in the price index has not been
taken into consideration by the Tribunal. Counsel appearing for
the appellant contends that accident had occurred on 6.9.2001
and the Second Schedule was inserted in the Motor Vehicles Act
by amending the Act of 1988 in the year 1994 w.e.f. 14.11.1994.
Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of
this Court in MAC. App. No.297/2005 in which the inflation and
increase in the cost of living index has been taken into
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 2 of 5
consideration.
Per contra, counsel for the respondent contends that
there is no illegality and perversity in the order passed by the
Tribunal and the appellant did not lead evidence to disclose the
nature of his employment. Counsel also contends that correct
multiplier of 11 after taking into consideration the age of the
defendants has been applied by the Tribunal.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In the Second Schedule the criteria for taking into
consideration the multiplier as well as the income of the
deceased, a formula was inserted in the year 1994 and thereafter
no revision has been made in the Second Schedule. In Sub Clause
(c) of Section 163-A, the legislature mandated that the Central
Government may keeping in view the cost of living from time to
time amend the Second Schedule by notification in the official
gazette. But, however, no such notification has been issued by
the Central Government even after a lapse of more than 12 years
from the date when the said Section 163-A and the Second
Schedule was brought on the statute of Motor Vehicles Act. Under
the Minimum Wages Act, the salary of Rs.1,382/- in the year 1994
was increased to Rs.2579/- in the year 2001 and Rs.3312/- as on
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 3 of 5
1.8.2006. The price index has also increased manifold due to the
inflation and as per the judgment of this Court in MAC. App.
297/2005, this Court has observed increase of at least 50% in the
minimum wages from the year 1997 to 2003. It is, thus, apparent
that the wages have increased almost double from the year 1994
till 2006 (the revision in the minimum wages is also based on the
price index).
In view of the said increase in the price index, I feel
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal by not taking into
consideration the increase in the price index is inappropriate. I do
not feel inclined to interfere with the multiplier of 11 years and
also the award of Rs.15,000/- made towards consortium/non-
pecuniary damages. The compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- as
granted by the Tribunal towards the loss of financial dependance
of the defendants shall now needs to be calculated on the basis of
double of the annual income as on the date of accident i.e.
rd
Rs.30,000/- and after deducting 1/3 of the sum towards personal
expenses of the deceased, the said amount would come to
Rs.20,000/- per annum and with the multiplier of 11 being
applicable in the present case, the total compensation towards
the loss of financial dependance would come to Rs.2,20,000/-.
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 4 of 5
Since the appellant has already received a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-,
therefore, the balance amount shall be paid by respondent No.3
insurer with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the
appeal.
With these directions, the appeal is disposed of.
October 03, 2007 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
ga
MAC. App. No. 139/2005 Page 5 of 5