Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Madhu & Ors.

1. The present appeal preferred by the insurer under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, seeks to assail the award dated 13.05.2022 passed by the learned MACT in MACT No. 245/2017. Vide the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has allowed the claim of respondent nos. 1 to 3 by awarding a sum of Rs.41,26,605/- as compensation with interest @ 6% p.a.

2. The said amount has been computed by taking into account the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.23,917/- and thereafter determining the amount towards loss of dependency by deducting 1/4th of his monthly income towards his personal and living expenses. The compensation also includes a sum of Rs 44,000/- towards loss of consortium for each of the four original claimants, one of whom i.e Shri Ram Nath, the father of the deceased, expired during the pendency of the trial before the Tribunal itself.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the grievance of the appellant is confined to two aspects, the first being that taking into account that the father of the deceased, who was one of the claimants, had expired during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Tribunal and therefore 1/3rd of the income of the deceased was required to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses as against the 1/4th amount deducted by the Tribunal. Furthermore, no amount could have been awarded towards loss of consortium in favour of the father of the deceased who had expired before the passing of the award.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly concedes that both these grounds taken by the appellant are merited. He, therefore, prays that the impugned award be modified to the aforesaid extent.

5. In the light of the aforesaid and taking into account the admitted position that the father of the deceased, namely Ram Nath, had expired during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Tribunal, the award is required to be modified. Since after the death of Shri Ram Nath, the dependent family members of the deceased stands reduced to three and therefore a deduction of 1/3rd was required to be made towards his personal and living expenses for determining the loss of dependency, as against the deduction of 1/4th directed under the impugned award. Furthermore, once Mr. Ram Nath had already expired before the passing of the award, no amount could have been awarded towards the loss of consortium qua him.

6. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed partly by, modifying paragraphs nos. 21 to 25 of the impugned award which will now read as under: “21. Irrespective of this, 1/3rd of the earnings of deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and living expenses in view of the law already discussed above. Further, since this Tribunal has assumed that the age of deceased was 43 years at the time of accident, in view of the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi &Ors. (Supra), the petitioner is also held entitled to an addition of 30% of the above amount of his earnings towards future prospects. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the present case comes to Rs. 34,82,315/- (rounded off) (Rs. 23,917/- X 130/100 X 2/3 X 14 X 12). This amount is awarded to the petitioners under this head.

COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY

23. In terms of propositions laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra), the petitioners are also held entitled to amounts of Rs. 16,500/each under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Further, in view of subsequent judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd Vs Satinder Kaur &Ors MANU/HC/0500/2020 and The New India Assurance Company Ltd &Ors Vs Somwati&Ors MANU/HC/0674/2020, the petitioners are further entitled to compensation under the head "loss of consortium”:- Filial Consortium: Rs. 44,000/- Parental Consortium: Rs. 44,000/- Spousal Consortium: Rs. 44,000/-

24. Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- (Rs.16,500/- + 16,500/- +44,000/- + Rs. 44,000/- + Rs. 44,000/-) under this head.

ISSUE NO.3/RELIEF

25. The petitioners are thus awarded a sum of Rs. 36,47,315/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Three Hundred & Fifteen only) (Rs. 34,82,315/- + Rs 1,65,000/-), along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of DAR. However, it is directed that the amount of interim award, shall be excluded from the above amount and calculations of compensation.”

7. As a result of aforesaid modification, the total compensation stands reduced to Rs 36,47,415/- from Rs 41,26,605/- i.e by a sum of Rs.4,79,290/-. This amount of Rs 4,79,290/- will be reduced from the compensation payable to the respondent no. 1 and there will be no change in the amount payable to respondent 2 and 3.

8. Taking into account that the amount payable to respondent no. 1 is being reduced, it is directed that while she will be entitled to forthwith receive a sum of Rs. 3,43,512/- in her bank account as already directed in para 26.[1] of the impugned award, the remaining amount payable to her, in terms of this order, will be released in her savings/MACT Claim SB Account bearing no. 2021101028570, IFSC Code- CNRB0002021 maintained with Canara Bank, Branch Paharganj Delhi (PAN No. BFFPB1008A). The said amount would be kept in the form of 125 monthly Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs), payable in equal amounts for a period of 125 months in succession.

9. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of REKHA PALLI, J FEBRUARY 27, 2023