THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. vs. SMT. KRISHNA & ORS.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of Decision: 6 November, 2012
+ MAC APP. 513/2012
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. ..... Appellant.
Through: Mr.A.K.Soni, Advocates
versus
SMT. KRISHNA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Uday Raj Singh, Advocate for R-1 to
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 reduction of compensation of ` 9,54,500/- awarded by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of
Respondents No.1 to 3 for the death of Kajod Singh, who died on
26.09.2007 in a motor vehicle accident, which occurred on
05/06.04.2005.
2. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance
Company. Thus, the same has attained finality.
3. During inquiry before the Claims Tribunal, it was claimed that deceased
Kajod Singh was working as a driver with Dr.K.C. Narang, C-304 Sheikh
Sarai, New Delhi and was getting a salary of ` 4,800/- per month. The
deceased Kajod Singh before succumbing to the injuries remained in
comma for a period of two years.
MAC APP 513/2012 Page 1 of 5

4. The First Respondent filed an affidavit testifying to the averments made
in the Claim Petition. She deposed that the deceased Kajod Singh was an
employee of Dr.K.C.Narang and was getting a salary of ` 4,800/- per
month.
5. In the absence of any documentary evidence with regard to the
deceased’s income, the Claims Tribunal declined to believe that the
`
deceased Kajod Singh was earning 4,800/- per month.
6. Thus, the Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of a skilled worker,
that is, ` 3940/- per month as fixed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi under
the Minimum Wages Act, at the time of accident; added 50% towards
future prospects to compute the loss of dependency.
7. The Claims Tribunal awarded an overall compensation of ` 9,54,500/-
which is tabulated hereunder:-

MAC APP 513/2012 Page 2 of 5


8. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellant Insurance
Company:-
(i) There was no evidence with regard to the deceased’s future
prospects; addition of 50% in the income to compute the loss of
dependency was not justified.
(ii) The compensation of ` 75,000/- awarded towards loss of love and
affection is on the higher side.
9. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Respondents (Claimants)
urges that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable.
10. I have before me the Trial Court record; PW-1’s testimony and affidavit.
LOSS OF DEPENDECY
11. In her affidavit Ex. PW-1/A, Respondent No.1 testified that her husband
Kajod Singh was working as a driver with Dr.K.C.Narang, C-304 Sheikh
Sarai-I (SFS), New Delhi-110017 and was getting a salary of ` 4,800/-
per month. In the cross-examination only a suggestion was given to the
First Respondent that she had not filed any documentary evidence in
support of deceased Kajod Singh’s earning. No suggestion was given that
the deceased Kajod Singh was not working as a driver with
Dr.K.C.Narang. It was not suggested to PW-1 that her husband (the
deceased) was not getting a salary of 4,800/- per month.
12. In the circumstances, the Claims Tribunal erred in computing the
compensation only on the basis of the Minimum Wages. The deceased
MAC APP 513/2012 Page 3 of 5

Kajod Singh’s income was sufficiently established as ` 4,800/- per
month.
13. The First Respondent was completely silent about the deceased’s future
prospects. The addition of 50% towards future prospects was not
justified.
14. On the other hand, the Respondents (Claimants) were entitled to an
addition of 30% towards inflation on the basis of the Report in the case of
Santosh Devi v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors., 2012 (4)
SCALE 559).
15. The loss of dependency thus comes to ` 7,98,720/-(4,800/- + 30% x 2/3 x
12 x 16) as against the compensation of ` 7,56,500/- awarded by the
Claims Tribunal.
16. The other grievance is that the compensation of ` 75,000/- awarded
towards loss of love and affection is excessive and exorbitant. Loss of
love and affection can never be measured in terms of money, normally a
nominal sum is awarded under the head of loss of love and affection.
Thus, uniformity has to be adopted by the Courts while granting non-
pecuniary damages. The Supreme Court in Sunil Sharma v. Bachitar
Singh (2011) 11 SCC 425 and in Baby Radhika Gupta v. Oriental
`
Insurance Company Limited (2009) 17 SCC 627 granted only 25,000/-
(in total to all the claimants) under the head of loss of love and affection.
17. In the instant case, the loss of dependency as computed by me is
approximately ` 42,220/- more than whatsoever was granted by the
Claims Tribunal. So even if it is assumed that only ` 25,000/- is awarded
towards loss of love and affection. The overall compensation thus almost
MAC APP 513/2012 Page 4 of 5

comes to ` 9,46,720/- as whatsoever was awarded by the Claims
Tribunal.
18. Thus, the Appeal is devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly
dismissed.
19. The statutory deposit of ` 25,000/- be refunded to the Appellant Insurance
Company.

20. Pending Applications also stand disposed of.


(G.P. MITTAL)
JUDGE
NOVEMBER 06, 2012
v
MAC APP 513/2012 Page 5 of 5