Allowed

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Munnavar Sultana & Ors.

Delhi HC5 Dec 2011MAC.APP./710/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the appeal filed by the insurance company against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award. The Court altered the compensation calculation to use unskilled worker wages, adjusted the number of claimants, and specified the distribution of the corrected total sum among the dependents.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; the compensation was recalculated to Rs. 13,74,740; interest at 7.5% granted; amount distributed to respondents via FDR; excess deposit refunded.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Munnavar Sultana & Ors. — Insurance | Delhi HC (2011)

¶1

$~24

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision: 5^th December, 2011

¶4

- MAC APP. 710/2011

¶5

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Adv.

¶6

Versus

¶7

MUNNAVAR SULTANA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Adv.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

¶9

J U D G M E N T

¶10

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶11

The Appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. impugns the award dated 18.05.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Tribunal) whereby a compensation of ` 16,60,242/- was granted on account of death of Sarvar, who was aged 24 years at the time of accident.

¶12

The contentions raised by the Appellant Insurance Co. are: -

¶13

(i) The Tribunal admitted that there was no evidence that the deceased was doing embroidery work still the minimum wages of the skilled worker were taken instead of minimum wages of an unskilled worker.

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

MAC APP 710/2011

¶16

(ii) The compensation awarded towards loss of consortium is excessive and against the ratio of Sarla Verma v. DTC , (2009) 6 SCC 121.

¶17

(iii) The number of claimants were 4 and, therefore, 1/4^th was to be deducted towards personal expenses instead of 1/5^th in view of Sarla Verma v. DTC (supra).

¶18

In my view the appeal is bound to succeed on the above grounds.

¶19

In the absence of any evidence as to the deceased’s vocation the Respondents (Claimants) were entitled to compensation @ 3,680/-, which were the minimum wages of an unskilled worker. On the basis of _Kiran Devi & Ors. v. Surjeet Yadav & Ors._ , MAC. APP. No.511/2009 decided on 18.01.2010; _Kanwar Devi v. Bansal Roadways_ , 2008 ACJ 2182; _National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Renu Devii_ , III (2008) ACC 134 and _UPSRTC v. Munni Devi_ , MAC. APP. No.310/2007, an addition of 50% was made by the Tribunal. The dependency thus works out as 3,680/- + 50% - 1/4^th x 12 x 18 = 8,94,240/-. In addition, the Appellants were entitled to a sum of 7,500/- towards funeral expenses, 10,000/- towards loss of estate, 10,000/- towards loss of consortium and 25,000/- towards love and affection in addition to the medical expenses actually spent i.e. 4,28,000/-. The total compensation is assessed as ` 13,74,740 on which the Respondents (Claimants) shall be entitled to interest @ 7.5%

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

MAC APP 710/2011

¶22

per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of the deposit of the amount in the Court after deducting a sum of ` 50,000/- (awarded as interim compensation).

¶23

Out of the awarded amount a sum of ` 4,28,000/- along with proportionate interest shall be paid to Respondent No.2 (the deceased’s father), the amount which was spent by the deceased’s father, shall be immediately disbursed to him.

¶24

From the remaining amount of 9,46,740/- a sum of 4,46,740/- with proportionate interest shall be payable to Respondent No.3 (deceased’s wife). A sum of 1,00,000/along with proportionate interest shall be disbursed to her while another 1,00,000/- shall be held in the form of FDR for a period of 2 years. The remaining amount shall be held in FDR for a period of 10 years. A sum of 2,50,000/- shall be payable to Respondent No.4 the minor child of the deceased, which shall be held in FDR till the time Respondent No.4 attains the age of 21 years. Respondent No.1 shall be entitled to an amount of 1,50,000/- out of which 50,000/- shall be released to Respondent No.1 along with proportionate interest and the remaining amount shall be held in the form of FDR for a period of 3 years. Respondent No.2 shall be entitled to a sum of 1,00,000/- out of which ` 25,000/- shall be released along with proportionate interest and the remaining amount held in the form of FDR for a period of 3 years. The Respondents shall be entitled to payment of monthly interest on the amount held in

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

MAC APP 710/2011

¶27

FDR by transfer to their savings accounts. The amount in the fixed deposit shall be held in UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi.

¶28

The appeal is allowed in above terms.

¶29

The excess amount deposited by the Insurance Co. shall be refunded immediately. Statutory amount of ` 25,000/-, if deposited, shall also be refunded.

¶30

A copy of this order be communicated to UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi.

¶31

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE DECEMBER 05, 2011 hs

¶32

Page 4 of 4

¶33

MAC APP 710/2011

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Munnavar Sultana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Munnavar Sultana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chanchal & Anr. Vs Basudev & Ors.

Beena Devi & Anr. Vs Basudev & Ors.

Parvati Vs UOI & Ors.

Bakshish Sobti Vs Ashok Kumar & Ors.

Prahlad Vs Ramesh Kumar & Ors.

Deen Dayal & Ors. Vs Babu Lal & Ors.