MAC .APP.No.64/2008 Page 1 of 5 10 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 64/2008 Date of Decision: 6th May, 2009 % POORAN CHAND SHARMA ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Jati Ram, Adv. versus OM PRAKASH RANA & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. for R – 3. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES 3. Whether the judgment should be YES reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The accident dated 22nd November, 1994 resulted in the death of Raj Kumar. The deceased was travelling in a red line bus whose driver applied sudden brakes due to which the deceased fell down from the bus and was run over by the bus. The deceased was aged 19 years at the time of the accident and was survived by his father who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. 2. The deceased was working as permanent employee with D.M.A.R.K Credit & Holding Limited as Circle Officer earning Rs.2,049/- apart from the other benefits. The salary certificate of the deceased was proved as Ex.PW1/C. The MAC .APP.No.64/2008 Page 2 of 5 deceased was also earning commission and the commission rates were proved as Ex.PW1/D. Prior to this employment, the deceased was working with M/s. Bell Security Services as Supervisor and was also registered with Employee Estate Insurance Corporation with registration No.ESI No.3765429 and was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. Copy of the Form 6 i.e. Return of Contributions was also proved as Ex.PW1/E. His identity card was also proved as Ex.PW1/F. 3. The deceased was an educated boy. He was holding a yellow belt from Mushidokai International Affiliated to Japanese Karate Federation, London which was proved as Ex.PW1/G. 4. The learned Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.2,049/- and deducted 1/2 towards the personal expenses of the deceased and applied the multiplier of 11 to compute the compensation of Rs.1,35,300/-. Rs.5,000/- has been awarded towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of love and affection. The total compensation awarded is Rs.1,55,300/-. 5. The appellant has challenged the impugned award on the following grounds: - (i) The income of the deceased was Rs.3,000/- per month and the learned Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,049/- per month. (ii) The future prospects have not been taking into MAC .APP.No.64/2008 Page 3 of 5 consideration. (iii) The compensation awarded towards loss of love and affection be enhanced. (iv) The appellant also challenged 25% negligence attributed to the deceased. 6. I have perused the evidence on record. The appellants have sufficiently proved the income of the deceased. The income of the deceased is taken to be Rs.3,000/- per month. The future prospects are taken to be 50% of the income according to the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129 decided on 15th April, 2009. The income of the deceased for the purpose of computation of compensation is taken to be Rs.4,500/- per month (Rs.3,000 + Rs.1,500). 50% is deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased and the loss of dependency of the appellant is computed to be Rs.2,250/-. The multiplier of 11 is applied according to the age of the appellant and the loss of dependency is computed to be Rs.2,97,000/- (Rs.2,250 X 12 X 11). The compensation for loss of love and affection is enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.25,000/-. The total compensation awarded is computed at Rs.3,22,000/- (Rs.2,97,000 + Rs.25,000). 7. The learned Tribunal has attributed 25% negligence to the deceased and has reduced the award amount by 25%. The reason for holding the deceased negligent is that the MAC .APP.No.64/2008 Page 4 of 5 deceased was standing on the gate of the bus. The finding of the learned Tribunal in this regard is not correct. The driver of the bus has a duty to take due care and caution. The driver was well aware that the deceased was standing on the gate and he had a duty to ensure that the passengers are inside the bus when the bus is moving. Nothing has come on record as to the duty discharged by the driver in this regard. The driver was expected to drive the bus in such a manner so as to ensure the safety of the passengers travelling in the bus. I do not find any justification in attributing 25% negligence on the part of the deceased. The driver of the offending vehicle is, therefore, held to be rash and negligent. 8. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The award amount is enhanced from Rs.1,55,300/- to Rs.3,22,000/- along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The enhanced amount along with interest thereon be deposited by respondent No.3 before the learned Tribunal within 30 days. 9. The learned Tribunal is directed to release 50% of the enhanced amount along with interest to the appellant and remaining 50% of the award amount along with interest thereon be kept in fixed deposit for a period of three years on which no withdrawal, loan or advance be permitted without permission of the learned Tribunal. MAC .APP.No.64/2008 Page 5 of 5 10. Copy of this order be given ‘Dasti’ to learned counsel for both the parties under signatures of Court Master. J.R. MIDHA, J MAY 06, 2009 mk