IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
FAO No. 304/2000
Judgment reserved on: 7th March, 2008.
Judgment delivered on: 13.4.2009
Manpreet Singh & Ors. ..... Appellant.
Through: Mr.Y.R. Sharma, Advocate.
Versus
Sukhvinder Singh & Ors. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate.
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
in the Digest? No
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. :
1. The present appeal arises out of the award dated
4.5.2000 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,94,000/- along with interest
@ 12% per annum to the claimants.
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 1 of 9
2. The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows:
On 2.4.97, Sardar Avtar Singh was driving his two
wheeler scooter and his wife and daughter Km. Gurmeet
Kaur were sitting on the pillion seat of the said scooter.
They were coming back to their residence and when they
reached at Ring Road near Naroji Nagar at about 9 P.M. a
bus bearing registration no. DL-1P-4455 driven by the driver
of the said bus in a rash and negligent manner hit the two
wheeler scooter, as a result of this impact Gurmeet Kaur
died at the spot and Sardar Avtar Singh received fatal
injuries.
A claim petition was filed on 6.5.1997 and an award
was made on 4.5.2000. Aggrieved with the said award
enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal.
3. Sh.Y.R. Sharma, counsel for the appellants contended
that the tribunal erred in assessing the income of the
deceased at Rs. 4000/- per month whereas after looking at
the facts and circumstances of the case the tribunal should
have assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 17,000/-
per month. The counsel further maintained that the tribunal
erred in making the deduction to the tune of 1/3rd of the
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 2 of 9
income of the deceased towards personal expenses when
the deceased was supporting a large family at the time of
accident and is survived by his wife, two minor children, one
son and mother. The counsel submitted that the tribunal
erroneously applied the multiplier of 12 while computing
compensation when according to the facts and
circumstances of the case multiplier of 13 should have been
applied. It was urged by the counsel that the tribunal erred
in not considering future prospects while computing
compensation as it failed to appreciate that the deceased
would have earned much more in near future as he was of
48 yrs of age only and would have lived for another 22 yrs
had he not met with the accident. The counsel also stated
that had the deceased not met with his untimely death he
would have been earning much more in the near future. It
was also urged by the counsel that the tribunal did not
consider the fact that due to high rates of inflation the
deceased would have earned much more in near future and
the tribunal also failed in appreciating the fact that even the
minimum wages are revised twice in an year and hence, the
deceased would have earned much more in his life span.
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 3 of 9
The counsel contended that the tribunal erred in not
awarding compensation towards loss of love and affection,
loss of estate and loss of service which were being rendered
by the deceased to the appellants.
4. Per contra, Mr. Pradeep Gaur, counsel for the
respondent submitted that the appellants are not entitled
to any further amount of compensation over and above the
amount already granted by the Tribunal. The counsel also
contended that for claiming any increase in the future,
cogent and sufficient grounds/reasons have to be disclosed
by the claimants and in the absence of the same, future
increase cannot be taken into account for determining loss
of financial dependence. Counsel for the respondent further
contended that in the absence of any evidence placed by
the appellants with regard to the future loss of income, this
Court may not interfere in the compensation amount
awarded by the Tribunal, which can not be considered
either as unjust or unfair.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 4 of 9
6. To prove the income of the deceased PW3 Smt.
Tejinder Kaur, wife of the deceased deposed that the
deceased and his family were living for the past many years
in the Gurudwara at Green Park, where free accommodation
was given to them and besides that he was being paid
Rs.1300/- p.m. and above that he used to earn income by
performing ceremonies at marriages etc., from which he
used to earn around Rs.17,000/- p.m. She also deposed
that had he not met with the accident then he would have
earned much more in the near future. She deposed that
the deceased used to give her Rs.10,000/- for household
expenses. She deposed that he had accounts in Canara
Bank and Punjab National Bank in Green Park and a house
worth Rs.8 lacs was purchased a year ago before the death
by way of instalments and had also purchased a plot for
Rs.1,43,000/-. She had brought on record the documents in
support of the said statements as exhibits PW1/3 to
Ex.PW1/40. The claimants also examined PW1, Shri Gurmit
Singh who is working as Granthi in Gurudwara. He deposed
that he was earning Rs.12,000/- to Rs.13,000/- per annum
and he produced a certificate Ex.PW1/1 signed by Secretary
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 5 of 9
Sardar Amir Singh Chawla which shows that the salary of
the deceased was Rs. 1300/- and was provided with a rent
free accommodation including water and electricity. The
said certificate also mentions that the deceased was
permitted to perform other religious activities on his own at
religious functions. Another witness PW2 Shri Madan
Singh, Head Granthi in Green Park, Gurudwara, was also
examined who supported the fact that the deceased was
earning Rs.17,000/- per annum though his regular salary
was Rs.1300/- . He has admitted that the deceased was not
an income tax assessee.
7. In my considered view the Tribunal committed no
error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/-
p.m. The monthly salary of the deceased was duly proved
on record at Rs.1300/- p.m. as per Exhibit PW-1. Besides
the said monthly salary, the Tribunal rightly took into
consideration the additional source of his income after
noticing the fact that the deceased was a Head Granthi at a
Gurudwara and it is a matter of common knowledge that a
Granthi apart from performing religious ceremonies at
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 6 of 9
Gurudwara also performs Akhand Path, Ardaas, Khula Path,
marriage ceremonies at other functions.
8. I therefore do not find any ground for further
enhancement in the income that to the extent of
Rs.17,000/- per month without there being any cogent
evidence to support. No interference in this regard is
warranted.
9. As regards the contention of the counsel for the
appellant that the tribunal erred in applying the multiplier of
12 in the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the
tribunal has committed an error. The deceased was of 48
years of age at the time of the accident and is survived by
his widow, two minor children, a son and his mother. I am of
the view that after looking at the age of the claimants and
the deceased the multiplier of 13 ought to be applied in
accordance with the II Schedule to the M.V. Act, therefore,
the award is modified to the said extent.
10. As regards the issue of deduction to the tune of 1/3 rd
made by the Tribunal being on lower side as the deceased
is survived by his widow, two minor children, a son and his
aged mother, I am of the view that the interest of justice
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 7 of 9
would be best served if ΒΌ deduction is made herein. Thus,
the award is modified to the said extent.
11. The other contention of the counsel for the appellant is
that the tribunal erred in not granting adequate
compensation towards loss of consortium and funeral
expenses and no compensation has been granted towards
loss of love and affection and loss of estate. In this regard
compensation towards loss of love and affection is awarded
at Rs.40,000/- the compensation towards loss of consortium
and funeral expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/- shall be
considered as compensation towards funeral expenses and
compensation towards loss of estate is awarded at Rs.
10,000/-. Further, Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards loss of
consortium.
12. As far as the contention pertaining to the award of
amount towards mental pain and sufferings caused to the
appellants due to the sudden demise of the deceased and
the loss of services, which were being rendered by the
deceased to the appellants is concerned, I do not feel
inclined to award any amount as compensation towards the
same as the same are not conventional heads of damages.
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 8 of 9
13. The total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,68,000/-.
After considering Rs. 1,10,000/- which is granted towards
non-pecuniary damages the total compensation comes out
as Rs. 5,78,000/-.
14. In view of the above discussion, the total
compensation is enhanced to Rs. 5,78,000/- from Rs.
3,94,000/-. The differential amount shall be paid with
interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the
present petition till realisation and the same should be paid
to the appellants by the respondent insurance company in
the same proportion as awarded by the tribunal.
15. With the above direction, the present appeal is
disposed of.
13.4.2009 KAILASH GAMBHIR J.
mg
FAO. No.304/2000 Page 9 of 9