Sebastiani Lakra vs National Insurance Company Ltd.

3. The   MACT   found   that   the   revised   basic   pay   of   the deceased   was   Rs.51,328/­   and   he   was   entitled   to   DA   of Rs.7,237/­ at the time of his death i.e. he was getting a total salary of Rs.58,565/­.  However, the MACT, for the purposes of compensation, assessed the monthly income of deceased at Rs.50,000/­   per   month   and   deducted   1/3   for   his   personal expenses  leaving   a  datum  figure of Rs.33,333/­ per  month. Since the deceased was 52 years old, the MACT following the judgment  of   this   Court in  Sarla  Verma  v.  DTC1, applied a multiplier   of   11   and   assessed   compensation   at Rs.40,00,000/­ for loss of income, Rs.25,000/­ was added for funeral   expenses,   Rs.5,000/­   for   the   loss   of   estate, Rs.50,000/­ towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/­ for 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 loss of affection i.e. total compensation of Rs.40,90,000/­ was awarded to the claimants.   The claimants and the insurance company   filed   appeals   challenging   the   quantum   of compensation.     The   main   ground   raised   by   the   insurance company   was   that   the  claimants  were  being   paid a  sum   of Rs.50,082/­ per month under the Employees Family Benefit Scheme   (for   short   ‘the   EFB   Scheme’).     The   High   Court, without giving any reasons, has reduced the compensation by almost   Rs.5,00,000/­,   to   Rs.36,00,000/­.     Reasons   are   the heart   and   soul   of   any   judicial   pronouncement.     No   judicial order   is   complete   without   reasons   and   it   is   expected   that every   court  which   passes  an  order, should  give  reasons  for the same.

15. As held by the House of Lords in Perry  v.  Cleaver7 the insurance amount is the fruit of premium paid in the past, pension   is   the   fruit   of   services   already   rendered   and   the wrong   doer   should   not   be   given   benefit   of   the   same   by deducting it from the damages assessed.

17. The   issue   before   us   is   whether   we   should   deduct   the amount being received by the family members under the EFB Scheme while calculating the loss of income.

22. It   is   not   disputed   that   the   last   drawn   income   of   the deceased including DA was Rs.58,565/­. On this amount, the deceased would definitely have been paying some income tax. Since exact calculations of the same has not been given, we deduct about Rs.2,565/­ per month for this purpose and for purposes of calculation of loss of income, assess the income as   Rs.56,000/­   per   month.     Out   of   this   amount   1/3   is deducted   i.e.   Rs.18,667/­,   for   personal   expenses   leaving   a balance of Rs. 37,333/­ per month as loss of dependency to the   family,   which   works   out   to   Rs.4,47,996/­   per   annum. Applying  a  multiplier of 11, the compensation  works out to Rs.49,27,956/­.     In   addition   thereto,   according   to   the 18 judgment   of   this   Court   in  Pranay   Sethi  case   (supra),   the claimants   are   entitled   to   Rs.15,000/­   for   loss   of   estate, Rs.40,000/­   loss   of   consortium,   Rs.15,000/­   for   funeral expenses   i.e.   a   total   amount   of   Rs.49,97,956/­   which   is rounded   off   to   Rs.50,00,000/­.     On   this   amount,   the claimants   shall   be   entitled   to   interest   @   of   9%   per   annum from the date of filing of the petition till the payment of the amount.  Obviously, the insurance company shall be entitled to deduct/adjust the amounts already paid by it.

23. The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms.  Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.