FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 1 of 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No. 759/2003 Judgment reserved on: 14.3.2008 % Judgment delivered on: 27.4.2009 Mrs. Kanti Devi ...... Appellants Through: Mr. J.S. Kanwar, Advocate versus Rohani Parsad & Ors. ..... Respondents Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO in the Digest? KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. 1. The present appeal arises out of the award dated 19/07/2003 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,24,800/- along with interest @ 8% per annum to the claimants. 2. The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows: FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 2 of 8 3. On 04/10/98 at about 9.20 p.m. while deceased was going on his bicycle on Loni Road near G.T. Road Flyover, the offending Tata Tempo bearing registration No. DL-IL-B8441 came in a rash and negligent manner from behind and hit the cycle and due to the forceful impact deceased received serious injuries. He was admitted in the G.T. Hospital, where he was declared dead by the attending doctor. 4. A claim petition was filed on 30/11/98 and an award was passed on 19/07/2003. Aggrieved with the said award enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal. 5. Sh. J.S. Kanwar, counsel for the appellants contended that the tribunal erroneously applied the multiplier of 13. It was urged by the counsel that the tribunal erred in not considering future prospects while computing compensation as it failed to appreciate that the deceased would have earned much more in near future as he was of 22 yrs of age only. It was also alleged by the counsel that the tribunal did not consider the fact that due to high rates of inflation the deceased would have earned much more in near future and the tribunal also failed in appreciating the fact that even the minimum wages are revised twice in an year and hence, the deceased would have earned much more in FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 3 of 8 his life span. The counsel also raised the contention that the rate of interest allowed by the tribunal is on the lower side and the tribunal should have allowed simple interest @ 20% per annum in place of only 8% per annum. The counsel contended that the tribunal has erred in not awarding compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral expenses, loss of estate, loss of consortium, mental pain and sufferings and the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the appellants. 6. Nobody appeared for the respondents. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. The appellants have not raised any dispute regarding the income of the deceased as assessed by the Tribunal. 8. As regards the future prospects, I am of the view that there though is no sufficient material on record to award future prospects. 9. However, a perusal of the minimum wages notified under the Minimum Wages Act show that to neutralize increase in inflation and cost of living, minimum wages virtually double after every 10 years. For instance, minimum wages of skilled labourers FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 4 of 8 as on 1.1.1980 was Rs. 320/- per month and same rose to Rs. 1,083/- per month in the year 1990. Meaning thereby, from year 1980 to year 1990, there has been an increase of nearly 238% in the minimum wages. Thus, it could safely be assumed that income of the deceased would have doubled in the next 10 years. Since, the income of the deceased was assessed by the tribunal in accordance with rates of minimum wages notified under the MW Act, thus, the tribunal ought to have considered increase in minimum wages as well. Therefore, the award is modified to this extent. 10. As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant that the tribunal erred in applying the multiplier of 13 in the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the tribunal has committed error. This case pertains to the year 1998 and at that time II schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act had already been brought on the statute book. The age of the deceased at the time of the accident was 22 years and he is survived by his mother aged 45 yrs. In the facts of the present case, I am of the view that after looking at the age of the claimants and the deceased and after considering the multiplier applicable as per the II Schedule to the MV Act, the multiplier of 15 shall be applicable. FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 5 of 8 11. As regards the issue of interest that the rate of interest of 8% p.a. awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side and the same should be enhanced to 20% p.a., I feel that the rate of interest awarded by the tribunal is just and fair and requires no interference. No rate of interest is fixed under Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Interest is compensation for forbearance or detention of money and that interest is awarded to a party only for being kept out of the money, which ought to have been paid to him. Time and again the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the rate of interest to be awarded should be just and fair depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case and taking in to consideration relevant factors including inflation, policy being adopted by Reserve Bank of India from time to time and other economic factors. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any infirmity in the award regarding award of interest @ 8% pa by the tribunal and the same is not interfered with. 12. As regards the contention that the tribunal wrongly deducted interest for the period from 30/11/1998 to 4/2/2002 and, no reason for the same is assigned by the tribunal. But on perusal of the order sheets it is manifest that the claimant had FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 6 of 8 been negligent in proceeding the case and in not timely summoning the witnesses. Thus, for the delay caused on the part of the claimant, the tribunal did not award interest till the date when the witness was not examined. In cases of accidents the body is already wrecked and original positions cannot be restored, the courts should give technicalities a go bye and concentrate on fair play. The approach in awarding compensation has to be broadly based on the principles of justice, equity and good conscience and technicalities in the decision-making should be avoided. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial legislation. The Indian Parliament, being conscious of the magnitude of the plight of the victims of the accidents, has introduced several beneficial provisions to protect the interest of the claimants and to enable them to claim compensation from the owner or the insurance company in connection with the accident. 13. But at the same time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the claimants cannot be allowed to take advantage of the delay caused due to their own negligence in summoning the witnesses and in closing the evidence. Therefore, no interference is warranted in this regard. FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 7 of 8 14. On the contention regarding that the tribunal has erred in not granting adequate compensation towards funeral expenses, whereas, no compensation has been granted towards loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the appellants. In this regard compensation towards funeral expenses is enhanced to Rs. 10,000/- and compensation towards loss of estate is awarded at Rs. 10,000/-. 15. As far as the contention pertaining to the awarding of amount towards mental pain and sufferings caused to the appellants due to the sudden demise of the deceased and the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the appellants is concerned, I do not feel inclined to award any amount as compensation towards the same as the same are not conventional heads of damages. 16. On the basis of the discussion, the income of the deceased would come to Rs. 2850.00 after doubling Rs. 1,900/- to Rs. 3,800/- and after taking the mean of them. After making 1/3rd deductions the monthly loss of dependency comes to Rs. 1,900/- and the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs. 22,800/- per annum and after applying multiplier of 15 it comes to Rs. 3,42,000/-. Thus, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. FAO NO. 759/2003 Page 8 of 8 3,42,000/-. After considering Rs. 20,000/-, which is granted towards non-pecuniary damages, the total compensation comes out as Rs. 3,62,000/-. 17. In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is enhanced to Rs. 3,62,000/- from Rs. 2,24,800/- with interest on the differential amount @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realisation and the same shall be paid to the appellant by the respondent insurance company as directed by the tribunal and within 30 days of this order. 18. With the above directions, the present appeal is disposed of. April 27, 2009 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.