Mohd. Suhail Khan and Anr. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.

1. Impugned Award of 25th October, 2012 grants compensation of `6,14,462/- to appellants-Claimants on account of death of one Mohd. Shoaib, aged 29 years, in a vehicular accident on 24th March, 2012.

2. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned Award, is as under:- “Brief facts necessary for disposal of accident information report filed by investigating officer on 21.05.2012 are that the victim namely Mohd. Shoaid Khan received fatal injuries in an accident which took place under the flyover at Bhikaji Camaji Place, New Delhi on 24.03.2012 with a DTC bus bearing no. DL-1PC-9398 (red AC) being driven by its driver namely Hari Prakash. Thereafter, an FIR no.63/2012 was registered in police 2018:DHC:4213 station R.K. Puram under Section 279/304A IPC against erring driver of offending vehicle. At the time of filing of accident information report driver, owner and counsel for insurance company appeared and it was informed that the statutory report u/s 158 (6) will be treated as claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and they can file the reply to the form 54 and thereafter matter was adjourned for filing legal offer. During the course of proceedings, insurance company offers Rs.4,73,100/- as legal offer for full and final settlement of case. Driver and owner of DTC bus did not file reply. The claimants refused to accept offer given by insurance company.”

3. On the basis of evidence led, impugned Award has been rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (henceforth referred to as “the Tribunal”) and the breakup of compensation awarded is as under:- 1.) Loss of dependency: `5,69,462/- 2.) On account of Love and affection: `25,000/- 3.) Funeral expenses: `10,000/- 4.) Loss of Estate: `10,000/- Total: `6,14,462/-

4. The challenge to impugned Award by learned counsel for appellants-Claimants is on the ground that income of the deceased ought to have been assessed on the basis of Salary Certificate (Ex.PW1/7) but the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased on minimum wages payable to a matriculate. Learned counsel for appellants- Claimants submits that in view of Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680, addition towards “future prospects” ought to be 40% and not 30%, as awarded by the Tribunal. It is further submitted by counsel for appellants-Claimants that Tribunal has erred in not granting interest on the awarded amount. Lastly, it is submitted that the compensation granted by the Tribunal ought to be suitably enhanced.

5. On the contrary, learned counsel for respondent-Insurer supports the impugned Award and submits that the compensation awarded is just and fair. So, it is submitted by learned counsel for respondents that this appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, evidence on record and the decision cited, I find that the Salary Certificate (Ex. PW1/7) of the deceased is an undated document and is not duly proved on record and therefore, the Tribunal has rightly discarded it. But the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of deceased by treating him to be a matriculate. It is so said because as per Certificate from Board of Technical Education (Ex.PW1/4), three years diploma course passed by deceased ought to be equated with the graduation. While taking the minimum wages of a Graduate as applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 1st April, 2012 the income of deceased is reassessed at `9,282/- p.m. In light of Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench decision in Pranay Sethi (supra), addition towards “future prospects” has to be 40%. Accordingly, the “loss of dependency” is re-calculated as under:- `9,282/- X 12 X 140/100 X 17 X 50/100 = `13,25,469.60 (rounded off to `13,25,470/-)

7. As regards compensation granted under the „non pecuniary heads‟, it needs to be brought in tune with Constitution Bench decision of Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra). Accordingly, compensation granted by the Tribunal under the head of “loss of love & affection” is disallowed. However, “funeral expenses” are increased from `10,000/- to `15,000/-. Similarly, compensation granted under the head “loss of estate” is also increased from `10,000/- to `15,000/-.

8. In light of the aforesaid, the compensation payable to respondents- Claimants is reassessed as under:-

1. Loss of dependency: `13,25,470/-

2. Funeral expenses: `15,000/-

3. Loss of Estate: `15,000/-