Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 20th May 2026
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Dharmendra Sharma and Mr. Bhupender, Advs.
Through: Mr. Mudit Chaudhary, Adv.
23691/2026, CM APPL. 23692/2026 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Dharmendra Sharma and Mr. Bhupender, Advs.
Through: Mr. Mudit Chaudhary, Adv.
JUDGMENT
1. This common judgment shall dispose of the aforementioned appeals which were partially heard previously. MAC.APP. 208/2026
2. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company, assailing the award dated 29th November 2025, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, West, Tis Hazari Courts (‘MACT’) in MACT No. 968/2022, where compensation of Rs.62,12,320/- along with interest @ 9% per annum was awarded to the legal representatives of deceased Balesh.
3. On 25th February 2022, Balesh was driving a Bharath Benz container from Bengaluru to Hyderabad, along with co-driver Pradeep Kumar. At about 5:30 AM, the front tyre of the vehicle got punctured, and he parked his vehicle on the left side of the road. In the meantime, another container driven in a rash and negligent manner hit the vehicle from behind. Balesh sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot.
4. Mr. Dharmendra Sharma, counsel for the Insurance Company, assails the award on two grounds:
(i) That the income of the deceased, considered at
Rs.28,950/- per month, was based on an assignment letter, whereas the salary slips shows income of Rs.17,291/-. He contends that the same was ignored by the MACT.
(ii) That the future prospects were considered at 40% despite the deceased being admittedly above the age of 40 years, and, therefore, he contends that only 25% ought to have been provided.
5. As regards the first issue, the Court has perused the assignment letter dated 01st February 2022, based on which it is noted that the assignment was for a period starting from 28th January 2022 to 27th January 2023, and the total cost to the company (CTC) will be Rs.28,950/-, which includes HRA, allowances and benefits.
6. Prima facie, the Court finds that the MACT was right in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.28,950/- since he had already worked through February, and the assignment had started from January 2022.
7. However, counsel for the Insurance Company states that, as per the testimony of the PW[2], who stated in the cross-examination that the deceased was employed tentatively for 1 year with the option to renew the same for the coming years, he was not permanently employed.
8. It was stated in the cross-examination that the salary for the month of February 2022 might have been lower since he must have taken some leaves in the month. However, the suggestion that he was not employed with the company was rebutted and denied.
9. In these circumstances, the assertion of the counsel for the Insurance Company is not acceptable, considering that the testimony of PW[2] is clear and the reference to temporary employment is only to the extent that it was an engagement for 1 year, which could possibly be renewed thereafter.
10. The salary slip for February 2022 would have been based on the CTC of Rs 28,950/-, which was agreed in the engagement letter. However, some deductions would have been made for that particular month, which need not be considered, particularly for calculating the loss of dependency.
11. On the other issue concerning future prospects, the MACT has noted that the deceased was 40 years of age, and as per the Aadhaar card, his date of birth is given as 08th October 1981, making him 40 years, 4 months, and 17 days in February 2022.
12. Accordingly, as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680, the future prospects ought to be 25%.
13. Mr. Mudit Chaudhary, Advocate, appears on behalf of the claimants and does not contest the entitlement of future prospects at 25%, since the deceased was 40 years 4 months and 17 days at the date of the accident.
14. Accordingly, plea of the insurance company to that extent is accepted and the future prospects are taken at 25% as opposed to 40% taken by the Tribunal.
15. The revised compensation is as under: S.no. Heads of Compensation Awarded by the Tribunal Awarded by this Court
1. Loss of income per month (A) Rs. 28,950/- Rs. 28,950/-
2. Future Prospects @25% (B) Rs. 11,580/- Rs. 7,238/-
3. Less Personal expenses of the deceased 1/5th Rs. 8,106/- Rs. 7,238/-
4. Monthly Loss of Dependency (A+B-C=D) Rs. 32,424/- Rs. 28,950/-
5. Annual loss of dependency (D x 12=E) Rs. 3,89,088/- Rs. 3,47,400/-
6. Multiplier (F) 15 15
7. Total loss of dependency (E x F = G) Rs. 58,36,320/- Rs. 52,11,000/-
9. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 3,36,000/- Rs. 3,36,000/-
11. Compensation for loss of estate (K) Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 20,000/-
12. Compensation towards funeral expenses (L) Rs.20,000/- Rs. 20,000/-
13. Total compensation (G+H+I+J+K+L = M) Rs. 62,12,320/- Rs. 55,87,000/-
14. Rate of Interest Awarded 9% 9%
16. The compensation is reduced by Rs 6,25,320/-.
17. It is directed that Rs.6,25,320/- along with accrued interest be refunded to the Insurance Company.
18. By order dated 25th March 2026, entire amount of the compensation, along with accrued interest stands deposited by the Insurance Company before the MACT, the same is confirmed by counsel for appellant. 80% of the deposited amount was directed to be released to the claimant in terms of the direction of the MACT.
19. The revised compensation as noted above along with accrued interest be released to the claimant in terms of the directions of the MACT in the impugned award.
20. Accordingly, this appeal CM APPL. 28964/2026 is disposed of in above terms. MAC.APP. 245/2026
21. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company, assailing the award dated 29th November 2025, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, West, Tis Hazari Courts (‘MACT’) in MACT No. 967/2022, where compensation of Rs.19,10,872/- along with interest @9% per annum was awarded to injured Pradeep Kumar.
22. As regards this appeal, Dharmesh Sharma, counsel for Insurance Company, assails the award only on the ground benchmark income being considered at Rs.28,950/- per month. Similar arguments have been raised in respect of the benchmark income of the deceased Balesh in MAC.APP. 208/2026, since they were colleagues.
23. Considering that the reasons have already been provided for Balesh in MAC.APP. 208/2026, the same would apply to the Pradeep as well. The salary slip has been provided as part of the appointment letter dated 15th November 2021. There is no reason for the Court to doubt the same considering that they were colleagues and he was a co-driver. The appointment letter also mentions that he was appointed to the position of ‘driver’.
24. Accordingly, this appeal MAC.APP. 245/2026 is dismissed.
25. Statutory deposit, in both the above captioned appeals, be refunded to appellant/Insurance Company.
26. Both these appeals stand disposed of in the above terms.
27. Pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous.
28. Copy of this judgment be sent to the concerned bank.
29. Judgment be uploaded on the website of this Court.
JUDGE MAY 20, 2026/sm/zb