Delhi High Court
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. on 19 July, 2011
Author: Indermeet Kaur
Bench: Indermeet Kaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 19.07.2011
+ MAC APPEAL No. 398/2010
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
...........Appellant
Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani,
Advocate.
Versus
DEEPA BISHT & OTHERS
..........Respondent
Through: Mr. Brahma Nand Prashant,
Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Yes
INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 This appeal has impugned the Award dated 24.04.2010. The appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company. Contention is that the future prospects have been awarded in favour of the deceased although there was no evidence with the Tribunal of the deceased having a permanent job; he was only a businessman. The second contention is that under the head of "love and MAC APPEAL No. 398/2010 Page 1 of 4 affection", a sum of `1 lac had been awarded; a token amount could alone have been awarded.
2 The claimants had preferred a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act (hereinafter referred to as the „MV Act‟). Mr. Bhim Rak Bisht had died in an accident which had taken place on 07.02.2007. He was on a motorcycle when the motorcycle hit a truck coming from the opposite side; the deceased succumbed to his injuries. Compensation in the sum of `19,25,000/- had been awarded in favour of the claimants. Learned Tribunal had framed three issues. The widow of the deceased had been examined as PW-1. She had tendered income tax returns of her husband for the assessment year 2005-06 reflecting his income on his business to be `1,27,956/-; income tax returns for the years 2006-07 had however not been placed on record. There was only one return; it had been verified from the Department and was found to be correct. On this basis, the average income of the deceased was computed to be `1 lac annually. PW-1 had deposed that her husband had a regular income; this aspect had been borne in mind by the Tribunal to grant future prospects which were rightly considered. A catena of judgment of this Court as reported in 2008 ACJ 2182 (Delhi) Kanwar Devi Vs. Bansal Roadways, 2007 ACJ 2165 MAC APPEAL No. 398/2010 Page 2 of 4 (Delhi) Lekhraj Vs. Suram Singh and 2009 ACJ 1921 (Delhi) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Renu Devi have held so. It is also not the case of the Insurance Company that the deceased was not having a business or that this business would not be continuing in the future. Future prospects were rightly awarded. This finding calls for no interference.
3 A sum of `1 lac had been awarded as non-pecuniary damages under the head of "love and affection". The claimants in this case were 4 persons; they were the widow, two minor children and mother of the deceased. The mother was aged 62 years; the minor children were aged 6 & 3 years respectively. Time and again the Courts have held that money cannot compensate the love and affection that has been lost by the near and dear ones of the deceased; in this case two minor children of tender years have lost the love and affection of their father in their growing years. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of `25,000/- for each of the four dependents i.e. `1 lac under this head of "love and affection". This finding calls for no interference. In Kailash Kaur & Another Vs. New India Insurance Company Ltd. in MAC APPEAL No. 318/2008 decided on 24.03.2009, such an amount was upheld. The Impugned Award on no count calls for any MAC APPEAL No. 398/2010 Page 3 of 4 interference. Appeal is without any merit.
Dismissed.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 19, 2011 a MAC APPEAL No. 398/2010 Page 4 of 4