Shinder Kaur And ORS v. Rajinder Singh And ORS
!"!
#$ %&% ' ( '
'
'
)$
*+ )% ' ', '
! "# $$$$ ', '
- % ./01 % & ' ( ) *+%,*,*-
) #&
-+.*,** ' #&
/ / "2 /
3/!45#060 1 %22
3 %+44 )
**45-*6.! ' )
() 27
( 8
9(1(
)
:
rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.1 while driving the offending vehicle bearing No.PB-13T-5411 (for short 'offending vehicle'), owned by respondent No.2, which was insured with respondent No.3. * ;
( )(
)
' &'
!
!"
#
$%& '
( )
*
*
( #
)
+
* ) *$ %& ,- &
- ( ( (
( &'
)
**45-*6.!
() 27
( 8 6 ;((( ' & '
' 2 &
< '
& ( ( < '
&'
"
%
(( ( %) ( ( ) ' *
) ' '
!
' ' ' (( ( ( (
% < '
& ) 5
( &'
( ) (
= >=!%, (
) 9(1() '( (
=
(
= >=!%,
'
)
-6* %5.!)
=
>= !%%
)
- 65,,.! &
'
>=!%*)
--%*%,.!
)
= >=!%, =((
%5,,,.!
'
) (
' :
-6* %5.!
= >=!%,
- 65,,.!
= >=!%%
= %,7 '(
= ) (
)' ?
@'1 #
*,%5#9*5,,
') A 27) )
'
4 B
( &'
)
(
= ))
( '
)
'
) ( )
+ As per income tax return Ex. P-12, the annual income of the deceased was Rs.4,41,210/-. For the next year, his annual income was Rs.4,35,700/- as reflected in income tax return Ex. P-11. Income tax return Ex. P-10 was filed after the death which reflected an income of Rs.4,52,317/-. The same has been ignored on the ground that it has been filed after the death of the deceased. However, the income tax return has not been filed for any inflated amount and there is only an increase of around Rs.17,000/- in the income from the previous year. Even a return filed by the family members after the death can be taken into consideration provided the same inspires confidence and since the deceased had earned Rs.4,41,210/- and Rs.4,35,700/- during the previous years, it can be assumed that he may have earned Rs.4,52,317/- in the year when he died and the learned Tribunal has, thus, wrongly ignored the income tax return Ex. P-10. Accordingly, the income of the deceased is assessed as Rs.4,52,317/- per annum.
10.
The deceased was 62 years of age and the multiplier of 7 has rightly been applied in view of the guidelines laid down in 2009(6) SCC 121 - 'Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another'. The deceased has left behind 5 dependents and 1/4th of the income has rightly been deducted towards personal expenses. Accordingly, after taking the annual income of the deceased to be Rs.4,52,317/- and after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses, the
annual loss of dependency comes out to Rs.3,39,237/-. The multiplier of 7 has to be applied and after applying the same, the total loss of dependency comes out to Rs.23,74,659/-.
11.
The claimants have been awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium. However, 10% increase after three years has not been granted on the compensation towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and as per law laid down in 2017 (16) SCC 680 National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi and Other, the claimants are held entitled to a sum of Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses. In addition, claimants are also held entitled to a sum of Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium in view of law laid down in 2018 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 333, 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Others', which takes the compensation to Rs.26,27,659/-. The compensation to be awarded by this Court is, thus, assessed as under:- Sr.
No.
Head of Compensation Compensation assessed by the Tribunal #" !
# ""
""
:
4;
2!"
5/ % 1.
Annual Income Rs.4,35,700/- Rs.4,52,317/- 2.
( 2*
2*
3.
Number of dependents 4.
Deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased (1/4th)
%,4+*6.!
%% ,4,.!
5.
Annual loss of dependency
*2556.!
+* 5.! 6.
Multiplier 7.
Total loss of dependency
**45-*6.!
* 5-26+.! 7.
Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
%26,,.!
8.
Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
%26,,.!
9.
Loss of
Rs.44,000/- each x 5 Rs.**,,,,.! each (Rs.44,000 X 5) 10.
Interest +7 &
*6 5-*6.!
*2*526+.! %* " &'
'
**45-*6.! "
,,,,.! ') )
) =
**,,,,.!/--,,,=60 )
'
'
**45-*6.! ) '
**45-*6.! : '
' &'
) (
> ' &'
*6 5-*6.!) ' )
) )
*2*526+.!
' #
13.
The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 6% per annum, which appears to be on the lower side. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2022) 5 SCC 107 titled
, interest ought to have been granted @ 9% per annum.
%-
)
.
"%- - <= () A+7
( 8 (
**45-*6.!) ' &'
'' % &
' '
) %6
( ) "
#
' ?
@'1 #
C /#0 6 - *,*, >> 00!#?
# /0
#"5/#
89#;
, /"5"
#!
#
#:! #:
/"- %2, *,*% "
#
)
#
/;0
( %2 ( / 0
.', '
1
*6, *,*2 C :(.
D .
C '
D .