Partly allowed

Surjeet Singh & Anr. v. Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. (the New India Assurance Co. Ltd)

Delhi HC16 Mar 2018MAC.APP./475/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this motor accident appeal, the High Court enhanced the compensation awarded to claimants for the death of Smt. Manjeet Kaur. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court revised the gratuitous service valuation, adjusted non-pecuniary damages for loss of consortium and funeral expenses, and applied a multiplier of five, resulting in total compensation enhancement from 1 lac to 1.30 lac rupee

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,00,000 to Rs. 1,30,000 with interest at 9% per annum; respondent-Insurer to deposit amount with Tribunal for release to claimants.

Surjeet Singh & Anr. Vs Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. (the New… — Motor Accident Claims | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Decision: March 16, 2018

¶3

MAC.APP. 475/2015

¶4

SURJEET SINGH & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Om Prakash Gupta, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

AJAY KUMAR SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Parveen Kumar Mehdiratta, Advocate for respondent No.2-Insurance Company

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶8

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶9

Received on transfer.

¶10

Vide impugned Award of 25^th March, 2015, compensation of `1 lac has been granted to appellants-Claimants on account of death of Smt. Manjeet Kaur in a vehicular accident, which took place on 11^th March, 2009. The factual background of this case already stands noticed in impugned Award and so, needs no reproduction. Suffice to note that late Smt. Manjeet Kaur was aged 69 years on the day of the accident and was an illiterate house-wife. The value of gratuitous services rendered by deceased has been taken into account by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma Courts, East District, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned Tribunal’) while relying upon a decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.

¶11

MAC.APP. 475/2015

¶12

Page 1 of 4

¶13

Ltd. v. Manmeet Singh and Others, 2012 SCC OnLine Del 583. However, learned Tribunal has granted lump sum notional compensation of 55,000/- on account of gratuitous service rendered by her. In addition, compensation of 25,000/- has been granted under the head of ‘loss of love and affection’ ; 10,000/-under the head of _‘funeral expenses’_ and again 10,000/- under the head of ‘loss of consortium’.

¶14

In this appeal, enhancement of compensation is sought by appellants-Claimants while relying upon Supreme Court’s decision in Lata Wadhwa and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Others., (2001) 8 SCC 197 wherein the value of gratuitous service rendered by elderly ladies in the age group of 62-72 years has been assessed at 20,000/- _per annum_ . 3. Learned counsel for appellants-Claimants submits that while taking into account the inflation, the value of gratuitous service rendered by deceased ought to be assessed at 40,000/- per annum and in view of Supreme Court’s decision in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, multiplier of five ought to be applied and so, it is submitted on behalf of appellants that notional compensation of 55,000/- ought to be enhanced to 2 lacs. It is also submitted that in view of Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & ors. 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1270, compensation under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ deserves to be enhanced from 10,000/- to 40,000/- and the funeral expenses ought to be enhanced from 10,000/- to 15,000/-. Thus, it is submitted that quantum of compensation granted by learned Tribunal deserves to be enhanced.

¶15

Page 2 of 4

¶16

MAC.APP. 475/2015

¶17

On the contrary, learned counsel for respondent seeks to rely upon a decision of this Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shivani Sharma, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 12637 and Royal Sundaram (supra) to support impugned Award and seeks dismissal of this appeal.

¶18

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, evidence on record and the decisions cited, I find that Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa (supra) , has declared that value of gratuitous service rendered by elderly ladies in the age group of 62-72 years has to be assessed at 20,000/- _per annum._ While taking into account the inflation aspect, it is deemed appropriate to assess the value of gratuitous service rendered by deceased in the instant case at 30,000/- per annum. Since the decision in Lata Wadhwa (supra) was not relating to a vehicular accident, therefore, 50% towards her personal expenses has to be deducted. In the face of Supreme Court’s decision in Lata Wadhwa (supra), reference to decisions in Shivani Sharma (supra) and Royal Sundaram (supra) is of no consequence. Thus, the entitlement of legal heirs of deceased to compensation is to be computed at 15,000/- _per annum._ In view of Supreme Court’s decision in _Sarla Verma (supra),_ by adopting multiplier of 5, the notional compensation payable on account of death of deceased is assessed at 75,000/-.

¶19

So far as compensation granted under the non-pecuniary heads is concerned, in view of Supreme Court’s decision in Pranay Sethi (supra) , compensation granted under the head of ‘love and affection’ needs to be disallowed, but the compensation granted under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ is enhanced from 10,000/- to 40,000/- and ‘funeral

¶20

Page 3 of 4

¶21

MAC.APP. 475/2015

¶22

expenses’ are enhanced from 10,000/- to 15,000/-. In view of aforesaid, compensation granted is enhanced from 1 lac to 1,30,000/-. Respondent-Insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation with the concerned Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today and upon deposit of the same, it be released forthwith to appellants-Claimants.

¶23

The enhanced compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum. Since recovery rights have been already granted to respondent-Insurer, therefore, respondent-Insurer shall also have the right to recover the enhanced compensation from driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶24

Copy of this judgment be given dasti to appellants-Claimants’ counsel.

¶25

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

¶26

MARCH 16, 2018 s

¶27

Page 4 of 4

¶28

MAC.APP. 475/2015

Surjeet Singh & Anr. v. Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. (the New India Assurance Co. Ltd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjeet Singh & Anr. v. Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. (the New India Assurance Co. Ltd)

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

Inayat Rai Bharti Mittal Vs Rajit Bharti Mittal

Omi Khandelwal M/S Apni Duniya News Paper (Daily) Vs Saroj @ Sweety & Ors.

Saroj Jain @ Sweety Vs Omi Khandelwal & Ors.

Kalpana Vs Prem Wati & Anr.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Anju Devi and Ors.

Sudhir Rathi & Anr. Vs Rajbir & Anr.