* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO No. 409/1998
Judgment reserved on: 2.4.2008
% Judgment delivered on: 27.4.2009
Sh. Mahinder Singh & Anr. ...... Appellants
Through: Mr. O.P. Mannie, Adv.
versus
Sh. Mangal Singh & Ors. ..... Respondents
Through: Nemo
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may
be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO
in the Digest?
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the award dated 27/7/1998
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs. 22,000/- along with interest @ 12% per
annum to the claimants.
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 1 of 8
2. The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows:
3. That on 1.6.1984 at about 10.00 a.m. that Sh. Sunil Kumar
(deceased) was crossing the road near Kanjhawala Hospital and
he had almost crossed the entire road and reached near the
pavement on the other side when a Truck bearing registration
No. DGH-1163 driven by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently
at a fast speed came from Village Ghevera side and hit against
Sunil Kumar now deceased who received Fatal injuries and
succumbed to his injuries which he received in this accident.
4. A claim petition was filed on 23/7/1984 and an award was
passed on 27/7/1998. Aggrieved with the said award
enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal.
5. Sh. O.P. Mannie counsel for the appellants contended that
the tribunal should have assessed the income of the deceased at
Rs. 15,000/- per annum and applied the multiplier of 15 after
making 1/3 rd deductions as per the II Schedule as the deceased
was of 8 years of age and was studying in school. The counsel
further maintained that the tribunal future increase in income as
well. The counsel contended that the tribunal has erred in not
awarding compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral
expenses, loss of estate, loss of consortium, mental pain and
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 2 of 8
sufferings and the loss of services, which were being rendered by
the deceased to the appellants.
6. Nobody appeared for the respondents.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and
perused the record.
8. There are some aspects of human life, which are capable of
monetary measurement, but the totality of human life is like the
beauty of sunrise or the splendor of the stars, beyond the reach
of monetary tape measure. The determination of damages for
loss of human life is an extremely difficult task and it becomes all
the more baffling when the deceased is a child and/or a non-
earning person. The future of a child is uncertain. Where the
deceased was a child, he was earning nothing but had a prospect
to earn. The question of assessment of compensation, therefore,
becomes stiffer. The figure of compensation in such cases
involves a good deal of guesswork.
9. In cases of young children of tender age, in view of
uncertainties abound, neither their income at the time of death
nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor
chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 3 of 8
determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an
early age, the uncertainties in regard to their academic pursuits,
achievements in career and thereafter advancement in life are so
many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable certainty.
Therefore, neither the income of the deceased child is capable of
assessment on estimated basis nor the financial loss suffered by
the parents is capable of mathematical computation.
10. This case pertains to the year 1984 and at that time II
Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act was not brought on the
statute book. The said schedule came on the statute book in the
year 1994 and prior to 1994 the law of the land was as laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Lata Wadhwa and Ors. v. State
of Bihar and Ors. – (2001) 8 SCC 197.
11. In Lata Wadhwa’s case (supra) while computing
compensation, the Apex Court made distinction between
deceased children falling within the age group of 5 to 10 years
and age group of 10 to 15 years. In the said case, the Apex Court
had awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- as pecuniary damages and Rs.
50,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages to the claimants of the
deceased children falling within the age group of 5 to 10 years
and in case of the children falling within the age group of 10 to 15
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 4 of 8
years, the Court decided that the multiplier method should be
applied and the contribution of the children to the family was
taken to be at Rs. 24,000/-pa and then a multiplier of 15 was
applied and over and above that the conventional compensation
of Rs.50,000/- had been added to it, making the total
compensation as Rs. 3,60,000/-.
12. In the light of the above discussion, I would assess the
compensation in the instant case. It has come on record that the
deceased at the time of the accident was of 8 years of age and
was studying in school. The father of the deceased deposed that
the deceased was a healthy and an intelligent child and was to be
given higher education. But nothing has come on record to prove
the income of the deceased.
13. The tribunal should have atleast assessed the income as
that of an skilled workman on the basis of the minimum wages
notified under the Minimum Wages Act prevailing at the time of
the accident i.e. at Rs. 472/- pm.
14. Furthermore, it has been the consistent view of this court
that whenever aid of Minimum Wages Act is taken while
computing income, then increase in minimum wages should also
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 5 of 8
be considered. It is well settled that future prospects are not akin
to increase in minimum wages. To neutralize increase in cost of
living and price index, the minimum wages are increased from
time to time. A perusal of the minimum wages notified under the
Minimum Wages Act show that to neutralize increase in inflation
and cost of living, minimum wages virtually double after every 10
years. For instance, minimum wages of skilled labourers as on
1.1.1980 was Rs. 320/- per month and same rose to Rs. 1,083/-
per month in the year 1990. Meaning thereby, from year 1980 to
year 1990, there there has been an increase of nearly 238% in
the minimum wages. Thus, it could safely be assumed that
income of the deceased would have doubled in the next 10 years.
15. Also, since in catena of cases the Apex Court has in similar
circumstances made 1/3rd deductions. Therefore, 1/3rd deductions
towards personal expenses is made.
16. Also, considering that this case pertains to the year 1992
and at that time II schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act had not
been brought on the statute book. The age of the deceased at
the time of the accident was 8 years and he is survived by her
parents and the age of the father at the time of the accident was
41 years. In the facts of the present case I am of the view that
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 6 of 8
after looking at the age of the claimants and the deceased and
considering the multiplier applicable as per the II Schedule to the
MV Act, the multiplier of 15 shall be applicable.
17. Also, compensation towards loss of love and affection is
awarded at Rs. 20,000/-; compensation towards funeral expenses
is awarded at Rs. 10,000/- and compensation towards loss of
estate is awarded at Rs. 10,000/-.
18. On the basis of the discussion, the income of the deceased
would come to Rs. 708/- after doubling Rs. 472/- to Rs. 944/- and
after taking the mean of them. After making 1/3rd deductions the
monthly loss of dependency comes to Rs. 472/- and the annual
loss of dependency comes to Rs. 5,664/- per annum and after
applying multiplier of 15 it comes to Rs. 84,960/-. Thus, the total
loss of dependency comes to Rs. 84,960/-. After considering Rs.
40,000/-, which is granted towards non-pecuniary damages, the
total compensation comes out as Rs. 1,24,960/-.
19. In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is
enhanced to Rs. 1,24,960/- from Rs. 22,000/- with interest on the
differential amount @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of
the petition till realisation and the same shall be paid to the
appellants by the respondent insurance company in the same
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 7 of 8
proportion as awarded by the tribunal within 30 days of this
order.
20. With the above directions, the present appeal is disposed
of.
27th April, 2009 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.
FAO No. 409/1998 Page 8 of 8