IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI MAC App No. 53/2006 Judgment delivered on: January 14 ,2008 Smt. Sudershana Sehdev ..... Appellant. Through: Mr. Vijay Kinger, Advocate. versus M/s. Shivalik Builders & Anr. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Kamaldeep for the respondent no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR, 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 1 of 7 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. Oral: The present appeal preferred under Section 173 of The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, arises out of the award dated 16.9.2005 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 6,51,857/- along with interest @ 6%. Before adverting to deal with the contentions of the parties, it would be appropriate to give brief facts of the case as under: On 7.1.99, the deceased Sh. Jugal Kishore was going to Mata Vaishno Devi alongwith his wife, son-in-law and daughter Ms. Renu Narang in a Maruti Zen bearing registration no. HR-51-7414. The deceased was driving the Maruti Zen at the relevant time and when they reached near Panipat Chungi, a truck bearing registration no. HR-38-A- 8498 driven by the driver rashly and negligently hit the Maruti Zen, due to which the deceased suffered grievous injuries and was removed to Civil Hospital, Panipat where MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 2 of 7 he was declared dead. Shri Vijay Kinger, counsel for the appellant says that the Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd expenses from the annual income of the deceased towards personal expenses as the deceased is survived by his wife and three children. Counsel further contends that keeping in view the said number of family members of the deceased either 1/5th or at best 1/4th of the income towards personal expenses should have been deducted by the Tribunal. The second contention of the counsel for the appellant is that lower rate of interest @ 6% p.a. has been granted by the Tribunal keeping in view the then prevailing bank rate of interest on the fixed deposit. The third contention of the counsel for the respondent is that the Tribunal has awarded a meager amount of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and affection. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that it should have been at least Rs.1 lac as the deceased is survived by his widow and three children. Counsel for the MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 3 of 7 appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Solochana Marwah Vs. Sadhu Ram 139 (2007) DLT 234 to claim 1/4th deduction towards personal expenses. To claim a sum of Rs.1 lac towards the loss of love and affection and the pain and sufferings undergone by the family members due to the sudden death of the only earning member of the family, the counsel has relied upon the the judgment of this Court in Daya Arora & Ors. Vs. Kapur Singh & Anr. IV (2005) ACC 313. Per contra, Mr. Kamaldeep counsel for the respondent no.2 contends that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned award. Counsel contends that the Tribunal has granted adequate compensation keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. On the aspect of deduction of 1/3rd of the annual income of the deceased towards personal expenses, counsel also contends that daughter of the deceased got married prior to filing of the petition. Counsel for the respondent further MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 4 of 7 states that it is appellant's own case that one of the female child Renu got married and thereafter, there are only three dependent members of the deceased consisting of herself and two children. The contention of the counsel for the respondent is that in such circumstances deduction of 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses by the Tribunal cannot be held out to be incorrect. Counsel for the respondent also contends that the Tribunal has correctly awarded interest @ 6% p.a. as the same was the normal rate of interest prevailing in the year 2005 when the impugned award was passed. Counsel for the respondent also contends that the amount of Rs.25,000/- granted by the Tribunal towards loss of love and affection is absolutely just and fair. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. The deceased is admittedly survived by his wife and three children. The daughter of the deceased was MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 5 of 7 married. However, keeping in view the traditions in the Hindu families, it cannot be said that the families are not required to incur any expenses after the daughter is married. Nevertheless, in the judgment of this Court in Solochana Marwah's case (Supra), where the deceased was survived by his wife and three children, this Court has considered the loss of dependency of the family members and deducted personal income to the extent of 1/4th. I am not inclined to take any contrary opinion, therefore, award of the Tribunal to that extent is set aside and 1/4th of the annual income of the deceased towards personal expenses is deducted. I also find that the Tribunal has awarded quite a lower rate of interest @ 6% p.a. The Tribunal has not given any rational as to why such lower rate of interest has been awarded. Without interfering in the finding of the Tribunal, disallowing the interest on the compensation amount from the period mentioned in the impugned award, the rate of interest is enhanced from 6% to 7.5% MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 6 of 7 from the period mentioned in the impugned award. The Tribunal has also granted meager amount towards loss of love and affection. The Tribunal has also granted quite lower compensation amount towards loss of consortium and loss of estate as well as towards the funeral expenses. The compensation towards loss of love and affection is enhanced from Rs.25,000/-to Rs.30,000/-, funeral expenses from Rs.2,000/- to 5,000/-, loss of consortium from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.50,000/- and loss of estate from Rs.2500/- to 15,000/-. The appellant has already received the award amount as granted by the Tribunal. Let differential amount along with interest @ 7.5% p.a. be paid by the respondent to the appellant. With these directions the appeal stands disposed of. January 14,2008 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J mg MAC APP. No. 53/2006 page 7 of 7