FAQ No.571/2002 UNTIDE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAONo.571/2002 Date of Dedsion: October 30.2003 SARDAR KASHMIR SINGH & OTHERS .... Api^llants Through Mr.O.P. Mannie Advocate VERSUS SHRIGURMUKH SINGH AND OTHERS .... Respondents Through Mr.Ashok Kumar for Resps.1&2 Mr.Mohan Babu Aggarwal for Insurance Company Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR..JUSTICE S.K.MAHAJAN 3. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? To be refeired to the Reporter or not ? Whetherthejudgment should bereported in the Digest ? ' S.K.MAHA.IAN.(ORAL) : ADMIT. The matter being short, with the consent of the paities, the same has been heaid and disposed of by this ordei'. 1 > FAQ No.571/2002 Theappellanthas filed diis appealfor enhancementofcompensationfoi" the death of one Smt. SimianjeetKaur, daughter-in-lawof appellants1 and 2 and motherof appellantNo.3 in a road accidentcausedby the rash andnegligentdiiving of the offending vehicle by its diiver. The only pointaiguedby learnedcounselfor the appellantis that after takingnotionalincomeof thedeceasedat Rs.15,000/-perannum,thetribunalhasnot takeninto considerationthelise in the cost of livingand inflation k?as to airive at the averagenotional incometo assess the loss of dependencyto the family. It is no longa- res-integrathat while assessingthe loss of dependencyto the family of the deceased,the courtsand the tribunalsae requixedto take intoconsiderationnot only thefuture prospectsin thelife and careerof the deceasedbut alsothe increasein the cost of living and inflation. The deceased being the housewife was rcndeiing multifariousservicesto the family and becauseof her death, the family may have to hiie a pei^on for tenderingsome of those services. Second Scheduleto theMotor Vehicles Act was inserted in the year 1994. Notional income to be taken into considerationfor theawardof compensationfor thosepersonswho haveno incomeis part of Second Schedule. Because of increasein cost of living and inflation,the Governmentof India has been issuing notifications to increase even the minimum wages paidtothe workei^from timeto timeand, in myoprinion,in the same manner, the notional income mentioned in the Second Schedule is also required to be increasedperiodically. This court will, therefore,not be in errorin estimatingthe average notionalincomeof the deceasedat Rs.22,500/-per yeai". Deductingl/3rd from thisincometowardsherpersonalexpenses,thelossof dependencyto thefamily wouldcometo Rs.15,000/-per year. The deceasedwas only 26 yearsof age at the r > FAQ No.571/2002 timeof theaccidentand, thensfore,applyingthe multiplierof 18, as has been applied by the tribunal, the total loss of dependency to the family would come to Rs.2,70,000/-. Adding to this a sum of Rs.29,000/- as non-pecuniarydamages towai'dsfuneralexpensesand loss ofloveand affectionand estate,etc., ashas been awardedby die tribunal, the total compensationto which the appellantswould be entitled comes to Rs.2,99,000/-. I, accordingly,allow this appeal, modify the award and diiect that the appellants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs.2,99,000/- fiom the respondents. The appellantswill also be entitledto interest@8% per annum on the enhancedcompensationfrom the dateoffilingof the applicationbeforethe tiibunal till payment. October30,2003 (S.K.MAHAJAN) -Kapil' JUDGE