Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 21.11.2019
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Advocate for R- 1.
JUDGMENT
1. This application seeks early hearing of the appeal.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, it is allowed.
3. The application stands disposed-off.
4. Issue notice.
5. The learned counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of the insurance company.
6. At joint request, the appeal is taken up for disposal.
7. This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 11.01.2017 passed by the learned MACT in MAC No. 35/13 primarily on the ground 2019:DHC:6238 that Rs. 12,96,000/- was awarded to the claimant on account of ‘loss of earnings’ during the period of recovery from the injury. The injured has been rendered disabled up to the extent of 62%. Nevertheless, in Form 16 filed with the ITR, by the employer shows that he has been paid Rs. 12,96,000/- which comes to Rs. 54,000/- per month for two years. Therefore, this amount would not be payable to him.
8. The learned counsel for the respondents states upon instructions from the claimant’s son who is present in the Court that indeed it is correct that an amount of Rs. 12,96,000/- should be deducted as the said monies have already been received by the claimant from his employer. Therefore, let the same be deducted from the awarded amount.
9. Apropos the claimant’s disability the impugned order has reasoned as under:
10. In effect, the injured has been reduced to a paraplegic and would be unable to move without assistance and is also unable to perform his daily activities, he has been deprived of the ability to walk or cover long distances as he did prior to the injuries. A 'just compensation' warrants provision of amenities which could restore his movement to the optimum, especiallyfrom one place to another. Looking at the extent of disability suffered by the injured, the provision of a motorised wheelchair to him would be necessary as 'just compensation'. Let the same be provided to him in terms of the order passed in MAC.APP. 768/2011 titled as ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd vs. Jyoti Singh & Ors. dated 20.11.2019, wherein the amount of Rs. 5,46,845/- towards motorised wheelchair was directly paid to the wheelchair vendor. It will be open to the claimant and the insurer to choose his vendor and the type of wheelchair he prefers to his satisfaction and comfort.
11. The monies would be paid directly by the insurer to the supplier of the motorised wheelchair.
12. The Court would note that since the injured cannot recover from the quadriparesis which was caused to him because of the motor accident on 01.11.2012. Roughly seven years have gone by and the injured is now 71 years of age, he would obviously require somebody trained enough to assist him 24 hours round the clock.
13. It would be open to the insurance company to provide the services of a trained personnel for his assistance or to pay him the minimum wages of a semi-skilled person so that he could himself employ an assistant. The minimum wages for a semi-skilled person in Delhi at the relevant time was Rs. 8,008/- which would annually be Rs. 96,096/- [(Rs. 8,008/- x 12 (months)]. For the past seven years the minimum wages[1] of a semi-skilled person only for 12 hours would be as under: Year Minimum Wages Amount 2013 [Rs. 8,528/- + Rs. 8,918/-] x 12 Rs. 2,09,352/- 2014 [Rs. 9,438/- + Rs. 9,542/-] x 12 Rs. 2,27,760/- 2015 [Rs. 10,010/- + Rs. 10,140/-] x 12 Rs. 2,41,800/- 2016 [Rs. 10,582/- + Rs. 10,674/-] x 12 Rs. 2,55,072/- 2017 [Rs. 14,958/- + Rs. 14,958/-] x 12 Rs. 3,58,992/- 2018 [Rs. 15,296/- + Rs. 15,400/-] x 12 Rs. 3,68,352/- TOTAL Rs. 16,61,328/- Rs. 16,61,328/- x 1/12 (minimum wages revised 12 times) Rs. 1,38,444/-
14. The aforesaid monies shall be payable @ 9% from each year of it being accrued i.e. each year when the money became due.
15. Since the injured is alive, therefore, the payment for provision of such support shall be provided, at least, for the next five years. Therefore, the said monies shall be deposited on this account before the learned Tribunal which shall be deducted on the basis of a surviving certificate shown to the learned Tribunal.
16. As the appellant is now 71 years old, a multiplier of 5 shall be applied for computing ‘future attendant charges’. Accordingly, the amount payable towards the same shall be as under: Rs. 15,920/- (minimum wages w.e.f. 01.10.2019) x 12 (months) x 5 (multiplier) = Rs. 9,55,200/-. 1 revised twice per year i.e. in the month of April and October
17. If there is any unutilised amount, the same shall be returned to the appellant. If the injured outlives the aforesaid amount, the insurer shall pay the prevailing minimum wages for a semi-skilled person for the remainder of his life.
18. Excess amounts, as may be, shall be deposited before the learned Tribunal within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order for it to be released to the beneficiary(ies) of the Award in terms of the scheme of disbursement specified therein.
19. The appellant is stated to have deposited an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/. The respondent is stated to have a recurring expense and that he immediately requires some monies for replacement of his pacemaker which costs up to Rs. 11,00,000/-. In the circumstances, let Rs. 15,00,000/- be released directly into his bank account bearing no. 0170104000118354, IFSC Code: IBKL0000170, IDBI Bank, 11, New Rajdhani Enclave, Vikas Marg, Preet Vihar, Delhi – 110 092.
20. The appeal is disposed-off in the above terms.
21. Since the appellant has partially succeeded in the appeal, let the statutory amount, alongwith interest accrued thereon, be returned to it.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J NOVEMBER 21, 2019 AB