Dismissed

Deji Devi and Ors. v. M/S Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Delhi HC16 Dec 2024MAC.APP./316/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants appealed an MACT award seeking enhancement on grounds that the deceased truck driver's income should be assessed at Rs.25,000 per month rather than Rs.20,000 per month. The High Court found the employer's testimony supported Rs.20,000 per month, upheld the Tribunal's assessment, and dismissed the appeal.

What the court decided

AI extract

Deji Devi and Ors. Vs M/S Liberty Videocon General Insurance… — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- MAC.APP. 316/2023

¶4

DEJI DEVI AND ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Manish Maini, Ms. Divya Saini & Mr.R.K. Singh, Advocates

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/S LIBERTY VIDEOCON GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. A.K.Soni, Advocate for respondent No.1

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 16.12.2024

¶9

The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the Appellants against the judgment dated 08.12.2022 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, seeking enhancement of the compensation granted in the sum of Rs.40,77,000/- along with interest @7.5% per annum on account of demise of Bahu Singh @ Babloo Singh in a road accident which occurred on 04.04.2017.

¶10

Briefly stated , on 04.04.2017 at about 11:00 PM, near Kambaliyas, Distrrict Bhilwara, Rajasthan, the deceased Sh. Babu Singh @ Sh.Babalu Kumar Singh (deceased) was checking rope and tarpal of the Truck after parking the same on the extreme left side of the road, with parking lights and indicators on, when the offending motor cycle bearing registration No. GJ-06KG-7625, driven by respondent No.2- Sh. Parth J. Yadav in a rash and negligent manner, hit him from behind, as a result of which he fell down and suffered fatal injuries.

¶11

FIR No. 122/2017, under Sections 279/304A IPC was registered at

¶12

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/12/2024 at 11:43:53

¶13

Police Station Gulabpura, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan. On completion of investigation, Charge Sheet under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed against respondent No.2. The claim petition was filed before the learned Tribunal by the wife, three minor children and parents of the deceased.

¶14

The learned Tribunal after considering the evidence, granted compensation in the sum of Rs.40,77,000/- along with interest 7.5% per annum to the claimants.

¶15

Aggrieved by the compensation awarded, the present Appeal has been filed by the claimants on the ground that the deceased was the Driver of a Truck and his salary was proved @Rs.25,000/- per month not only from the testimony of the appellant (PW-1) but also Sh. Amrinder Singh (PW-3), Employer of the deceased. However, the learned Tribunal has erred in not taking the salary of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per month. Thus, enhancement of the compensation is sought by the Appellants.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Respondent/Insurance Company countered the arguments and stated that the income of the deceased has been rightly assessed by the learned Tribunal and the impugned Award does not call for any interference.

¶17

7. Submissions heard and record perused.

¶18

The only challenge raised by the Appellants is in regard to the income of the deceased.

¶19

Smt. Deji Devi, PW-1, wife of the deceased, in her testimony before the learned Tribunal, stated that her husband was doing Private Service and was working as a Driver with M/S Deep Freight Carriers and

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/12/2024 at 11:43:53

¶22

was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. His salary receipt has been exhibited as Ex. PW1/3. The only suggestion put by the Insurance Company during cross-examination of PW-1 was that the deceased was not in the employment or was not getting income of Rs.25,000/- as deposed by PW1.

¶23

PW-3 Sh. Amrinder Singh, owner of M/S Deep Freight Carriers, deposed that the deceased was working with him since the year 2012. He was earlier driving other vehicles, but since he purchased the TATA Truck in the year 2016, he was driving the Truck. He further deposed that the deceased used to ply the Truck from Delhi to Mumbai and he used to pay him Rs.4,000/- to Rs.6,000/- per trip. In that way, the deceased was earning around Rs.20,000/- per month on annual basis. This witness also produced the original Notebook Ex. PW3/A from the year 2016 (i.e. when he purchased the Truck) till 27.02.2019.

¶24

On perusal of the testimony of the appellant and the witnesses examined by her, it emerges that though the Salary Certificate Ex. PW1/3 mentions that the deceased was getting salary of Rs.25,000/- per month but from the testimony of PW-3, it is evident that the deceased was paid for every trip he made. PW-3 has further explained that the deceased was getting average payment of Rs.20,000/- per month. The learned Tribunal has thus, rightly assessed income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per month.

¶25

There is no merit in the Appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶26

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶27

DECEMBER 16, 2024/ r

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/12/2024 at 11:43:53

Deji Devi and Ors. v. M/S Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Deji Devi and Ors. v. M/S Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd Azhar Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Re-Prime Resins Pvt. Ltd. Vs ....

Lalli Devi & Ors. Vs Shriram Gen Ins Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Sudip Kohli Vs Residents Welfare Association Dashrath Puri

Bharti Rathee Vs Pradeep Kumar & Ors.

Bir Singh Vs Pratap Singh through Lrs & Ors.