Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satish Kumar & ORS

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

..... Appellant Through:

Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate versus SATISH KUMAR & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Gurmit Singh, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4 with respondents No.1 to 4 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 06.12.2016 C.M.21233/2015 By way of this application, respondents-claimants seek modification of order of 5th February, 2015 wherein in paragraph No.8, the ratio of the Supreme Court's decision in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 has been reproduced as under: - "8.

In view of a three Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the claimants were further entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate." Learned counsel for respondents-claimants submits that it is clear

from the aforesaid paragraph No.8 that `1 lac compensation under the head of "love and affection and loss of consortium" has been granted to each of the respondents-claimants. This is disputed by learned counsel for appellant, who draws the attention of this Court to paragraph No.19 of Supreme Court's decision in Rajesh (supra) to point out that for "loss of consortium", `1 lac has been granted to the widow and under the head of "loss of care and guidance of minor children", another `1 lac has been granted in lump sum.

Attention of this court is also drawn by learned counsel for appellant to an order of 4th September, 2015 of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Appeal No.451/2013 titled The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Arti Devi & Ors. to submit that similar application has been already dismissed.

Since documents in support of averments made in paragraph No.6 of the instant application are not on record, therefore, the prayer in respect of paragraph No.6 is left open with liberty to appellant to file fresh application with complete particulars and supporting documents. Upon hearing and on perusal of the order of 5th February, 2015 in the light of Supreme Court's decision in Rajesh (supra) and Arti Devi (supra), I find that no substantial modification of aforesaid order of 5th February, 2015 is called for. However, it is clarified that in terms of Supreme Court's decision in Rajesh (supra), widow of deceased would be entitled to compensation of `1,00,000/- under the head of „Loss of Consortium‟ and the children of deceased would be entitled to compensation of `1,00,000/- only in lump sum. The application is disposed of with direction to learned Tribunal to

release the deposited amount as per order of 5th February, 2015 read with this order in the manner as indicated in the impugned Award. In aforesaid terms, this application stands disposed of. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE DECEMBER 06, 2016 s