Allowed

Babita & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar & Anr.

Delhi HC12 Aug 2011MAC.APP./350/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court allowed an appeal challenging a motor accident death compensation award. The court held that benefit of price index inflation and cost rise must be granted, overriding precedent to the extent necessary, and modified the award accordingly based on calculation principles.

What did the court decide?

The appeal allowed; modified award of loss of dependency fixed at Rs. 9,21,600/-.

Babita & Ors. Vs Ashok Kumar & Anr. — Delhi HC (2011) — LawSathi Research

¶1

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

% Date of Judgment: 12.08.2011

¶3

MAC APPEAL No. 350/2011

¶4

BABITA & OTHERS ………..Appellants

¶5

Through: Mr. S.K. Vashisth, Advocate.

¶6

Versus

¶7

ASHOK KUMAR AND ANOTHER ……….Respondents Through: Mr. D.D. Singh and Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocates for the respondent No. 2

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

¶9

Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes

¶11

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes

¶12

INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)

¶13

1 The Award impugned is the Award dated 18.11.2010 vide which compensation in the sum of Rs. 6,51,800/- had been awarded in favour of the claimants. The deceased Rakesh Ranjan had died in a road accident on 09.12.2007. The only ground on which this appeal has been assailed is that although minimum wages of Rs.3,964/- (rounded off to Rs. 4,000/-) had been taken as

¶14

MAC APPEAL No. 350/2011

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

the income of the deceased, yet the benefit of price index inflation had not been taken into account; contention is that the judicial notice should have been taken of the fact that the minimum wages get doubled over a period of 10 years; this principle had not been adhered to.

¶17

2 Learned counsel for the respondent states that in view of the judgment Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298, this benefit cannot be afforded to the petitioner. The judgment of Sarla Verma (supra) has not dealt with this contention. This court in a catena of judgments has granted benefit of cost rise and price index inflation; judicial notice has been taken of the fact that minimum wages also got doubled over a period of 10 years and this aspect is not akin to future prospects. This has been held by this court in M.A.C. Appeal No.1070-75 of 2006 decided on 24.1.2008 Kanwar Devi & Ors. Vs. Bansal Roadways & Anr. reported in 2008 ACJ 2182.

¶18

3 The “loss of dependency” has been calculated in the sum of Rs. 5,56,800/-. However giving the benefit of 50% in view of cost rise and price index inflation, the modified award will read as under:-

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

MAC APPEAL No. 350/2011

¶21

Rs. 4000 + Rs. 2000 (50%) = Rs. 6000 – Rs. 1200 (1/5^th of Rs.6000) = Rs. 4800 x 12 x 16 = Rs. 9,21,600/-

¶22

4 The modified award under the head of “loss of dependency” will accordingly read as Rs. 9,21,600/-. The Award has not been challenged on any other ground.

¶23

5 Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

¶24

INDERMEET KAUR, J.

¶25

AUGUST 12, 2011 rb

¶26

Page 3 of 3

¶27

MAC APPEAL No. 350/2011

Babita & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babita & Ors. v. Ashok Kumar & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paro Devi Vs Anil Mann & Ors.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Nisha Kohli & Ors.

Delkon Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vijay Meshram & Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Som Nath & Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Reema & Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Premwati & Ors.