Allowed

Smt Suresh Wati v. Ramesh Walia & Ors.

Delhi HC14 Nov 2017MAC.APP./356/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed Motor Accident Claim appeal to enhance compensation from approx. Rs. 5.3 lakh to Rs. 6.38 lakh by recalculating loss of dependency income using multiplier 18 and 40% future prospects post-Pranay Sethi, increasing interest to 9%, and awarding full share to the mother.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 6,38,000/-; interest rate raised to 9%; entire enhancement awarded to first appellant (mother) as fixed deposit.

Smt Suresh Wati Vs Ramesh Walia & Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~R-481

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Decided on : 14^th November, 2017

¶4

- MAC.APP.356 /2012

¶5

SURESH WATI ..... Appellant

¶6

Through: Mr. J.S. Kanwar, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

RAMESH WALIA & ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Adv. for R-3.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

¶10

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶11

Naveen Kumar, aged 24 years, a bachelor, died in accident that occurred on the night of 26/27.07.2010 due to negligent driving of truck bearing registration No. HR 38K 6773, by the second respondent, it being a vehicle registered in the name of first respondent and insured against third party risk with the third respondent. His parents (the appellants) (the claimants) instituted accident claim case (MAC Petition no. 817/2010) on 07.04.2010 seeking compensation. The tribunal, by judgment dated 01.10.2011, awarded Rs. 5,31,520/- as compensation with interest @ 7.5 % per annum, fastening the liability on the third respondent (insurer).

¶12

The appeal seeks enhancement of the compensation primarily on the grounds that the contention of deceased earning his livelihood at Rs.400/- per day from a private restaurant (Khushi Restaurant) was wrongly rejected and the multiplier of 14 wrongly applied according

¶13

MAC App. No.356/2012

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

to the age of the mother, the awards of Rs. 10,000/- each towards loss of love & affection and loss to estate and Rs. 5,000/- on account of funeral expenses as well as the rate of interest also being inadequate.

¶16

Having heard the learned counsel and having gone through the record, this Court finds reasons set out by the tribunal in not accepting the claim about the income from the restaurant to be correct. Mere reliance on food licence cannot suffice. Some further proof to indicate the turnover of the restaurant or the income generated from such business was necessary. In these circumstances, the tribunal correctly went by the minimum wages payable in State of Uttar Pradesh.

¶17

The tribunal, however, committed error by adding the element of future prospects of increase in income to the extent of 50%. Following the dispensation of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court rendered on 31.10.2017 in SLP (C) 25590/2014, National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. , such element of future prospects will have to be restricted to 40%. At the same time, the multiplier of 18 would apply as per age of deceased, in view of the rulings in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 .

¶18

The loss of dependency is thus, recalculated as (4020 x 140 ÷100 ÷ 1/2 x 12 x 18) Rs. 6,07,824/-, rounded off to Rs. 6,08,000/-. Instead of the awards under the non-pecuniary heads of damages granted by the tribunal, following the dispensation in Pranay Sethi (supra), the awards of Rs. 15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses are added.

¶19

MAC App. No.356/2012

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

Thus, the total compensation in the case comes to (6,08,000 + 15,000 + 15,000) Rs. 6,38,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh Thirty Eight Thousand only). The award is increased accordingly.

¶22

Following the consistent view taken by this Court, the rate of interest is increased to nine per cent (9%) per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. [see judgment dated 22.02.2016 in MAC.APP. 165/2011 Oriental Insurance Co Ltd v. Sangeeta Devi & Ors .]

¶23

The entire enhanced portion of the award, with the effect of corresponding increase in rate of interest, shall go to the share of first appellant Suresh Wati (mother) only, it to be released to her in the form of interest bearing fixed deposit account taken out from a nationalized bank in her name for a period of seven years with right to draw periodic interest.

¶24

The appeal is disposed of in above terms.

¶25

R.K.GAUBA, J.

¶26

NOVEMBER 14, 2017 nk

¶27

MAC App. No.356/2012

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Smt Suresh Wati v. Ramesh Walia & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Suresh Wati v. Ramesh Walia & Ors.

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

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Satish Tiwari & Ors.

Dp Pandey Vs Gurmej Singh & Ors.

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Yogesh Kumar Sharma & Ors.

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Majnu & Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Himayu Ali & Anr.

Sh Himayu Ali & Ors. Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.