Jaitun Nisha & Ors. v. Ajay Kumar Sharma & Ors.

1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 15.05.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.5,82,780/- in favour of the dependents of the deceased with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.

2. Instant appeal has been filed for enhancement of the compensation amount.

3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued the instant appeal on two grounds, firstly; the deceased failed to prove the salary certificate, therefore, ld. Tribunal has rightly considered the salary of the deceased as Rs.3,683/- as per the minimum wages for the unskilled persons. However, he is disputing that the ld. Tribunal has not granted any future prospects. 2013:DHC:5431

4. Second issue, ld. Counsel has argued that towards non-pecuniary heads, ld. Tribunal has granted Rs.25,000/- for loss of love and affection, Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.7,500/- towards funeral expenses.

5. To strengthen his arguments, ld. Counsel for the appellant has relied upon a case of Rajesh and Ors. Vs. Rajbir Singh and Ors. 2013 (6) SCALE 563 and submitted that keeping in view the age of the deceased as 37 years at the time of accident, ld. Tribunal ought to have granted 50% towards future prospects and on the non-pecuniary heads ought to have granted Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of love and affection, Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- for funeral expenses.

6. On the other hand, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent / insurance company submits that since the appellants could not prove that the deceased was working somewhere, therefore, ld. Tribunal has considered that he was not on a permanent job and keeping in view the dictum of Sarla Verma Vs. DTC and Ors. 2009 (6) SCC 121 further affirmed in the case of Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr. 2013(5) SCALE160, has rightly not granted future prospects.

7. Ld. Counsel further submits that in this case claimants failed to establish that deceased was working somewhere, therefore, ld. Tribunal has considered the salary of the deceased as Rs.3,683/- as per the minimum wages applicable to unskilled persons. Therefore, there is no discrepancy if the ld. Tribunal has not granted future prospects.

8. So far as the compensation on non-pecuniary heads is concerned, ld. Counsel for the respondent / insurance company submits that it depends upon case to case and the Tribunal or the Court has to consider the fact of that case. Therefore, ld. Tribunal, after considering facts and circumstances of this case, has rightly granted the compensation towards non-pecuniary heads.

9. As the issue of future prospects is concerned, this issue is no more res-integra as already been decided by the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh (Supra) and followed by this court in the case of ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance. Co. Ltd. v. Angrez Singh in MAC.A. 846/2011. Therefore keeping in view the dictum in Rajesh (Supra) and subsequent view taken by this court in Angrez Singh (Supra), keeping the age of the deceased as 37 years at the time of accident, I grant 50% towards future prospects.

10. As the issue of the non-pecuniary damages are concerned, keeping in view the dictum in Rajesh (Supra) I enhance Rs.1,00,000/- from Rs.25,000/- for loss of love and affection, Rs.1,00,000/- from Rs.10,000/for loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- from Rs.7,500/- for funeral expenses. Accordingly, the compensation comes as under:

1. Loss of income - Rs.3,683/- per month

2. Future Prospects (50%) - Rs.1841.50/- per month

3. Personal expenses (1/5th ) - Rs.1,105/- per month

4. Loss of dependency Rs.4419.5x12x15 - Rs.7,95,510/-

5. Loss of love and affection - Rs.1,00,000/-