Pushpa Devi & Ors v. Bhagirathi Yadav & Ors

J U D G M E N T G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶1This appeal is for enhancement of claim of compensation for the death of one Chander Pal who was aged about 32 years and gainfully employed at the time of the accident. Since the income of the of the deceased was not proved, the Tribunal took the minimum wage of a skilled workman i.e. ` 4358/- per month; added 50% towards the future prospects/inflation; deducted one-fourth towards the personal expenses; applied the multiplier

of 16 and calculated the dependency at ` 9,66,328/-.

¶2The Appellants do not dispute the quantum of dependency. It is urged by the Appellants' counsel that the non pecuniary damages towards the loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses were on the lower side. It is urged that the deceased was a young person aged about 32 years and left behind a widowed mother, a widow and two minor children. Some compensation towards the loss of love and affection ought to have been granted by the Tribunal.

¶3In Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., 2009 (6) SCC 121, the Supreme Court held that an amount in the range of ` 5,000/- to ` 10,000/- towards the loss of estate, ` 5,000/- to ` 10,000/- under the head of loss of consortium and actual amount towards the funeral expenses should be awarded.

¶4In this case, a sum of ` 10,000/- each was awarded towards the loss of estate and loss of consortium which is in conformity with Sarla Verma (supra). No evidence was led by the Appellants with regard to actual funeral expenses; thus award of a sum of ` 5,000/- on this count cannot be faulted.

¶5The deceased was survived by a widowed mother, a young widowed (wife) and two minor children. I award a sum of ` 25,000/- towards loss of love and affection.

¶6The Appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to

the extent that the Respondent No.3 Insurance Company is liable to pay an additional sum of ` 25,000/- towards the loss of love and affection along with interest @ 7.5 % per annum from the date of filing of the petition before the Tribunal till the date of payment. Respondent No.3 Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with the UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi within six weeks in the saving bank account of Appellant No.1 Smt. Pushpa Devi (wife of the deceased) who shall be paid the entire enhanced amount.

¶7The appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. No costs.

¶8Copy of the order may be sent to the trial court for information and compliance.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE

NOVEMBER 18, 2011 vk

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on: 18th November, 2011 + MAC APP. 242/2011 PUSHPA DEVI ETC. ..... Appellants Through Mr. Jatinder Kamra, Advocate. versus BHAGIRATHI YADAV & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Order? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the Order should be reported in the Digest?