$~ 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 7th November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 153/2010 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Appellant Through Mr.Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Advocate versus SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN & ANR. Respondent Through Mr. S.S. Jain, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 & 2 CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
J U D G M E N T
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 30.04.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `10,02,000/- was awarded in favour of the Respondents No.1 and 2 for the death of Archit Jain, a Software Engineer and a bachelor, aged 24 years at the time of the accident.
2. The finding on negligence is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company. Thus the same has attained finality.
3. The only ground of challenge raised in the instant Appeal is that the salary certificate placed on record before the Claims Tribunal was forged and thus the same should not have been taken into consideration to award the loss of dependency.
4. Since there was an allegation of forgery of the salary certificate placed on record before the Claims Tribunal, this Court by an order dated 07.05.2012 directed summoning of the concerned officer of the employer company to depose about the salary certificate. In pursuance to the same, statement of Ms. Nisha Bopanna, Senior Director, Keane India Limited was recorded who proved the certificate issued at the time of the appointment of deceased Archit Jain as Mark A and the revised salary Mark B. The genuineness of the certificate thus stands established.
5. It may be noticed that deceased Archit Jain joined Keane India Limited which is a large company having its operations in Gurgaon and registered office in Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi. The deceased was appointed as a Trainee Software Engineer by a letter dated 21.11.2005 and he was put on probation till 18.05.2006 and his salary was to be revised w.e.f. 19.05.2006. The deceased was found to be exceptionally brilliant and his salary was revised to `2,15,024/- per annum from `1,50,040/- w.e.f. 02.01.2006. Archit Jain, unfortunately, met with a fatal accident on 25.04.2006. Thus, from the salary certificates and testimony of Ms. Nisha Bopanna, Senior Director, Keane India Limited, it was established that the deceased had good future prospects. The deceased was a qualified Software Engineer and thus an addition of 50% towards future prospects should have been made to compute the loss of dependency.
6. It is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that a sum of `15,000/- towards medical reimbursement and `8,600/- per annum towards leave travel allowance were in the shape of reimbursements. It is urged that thus the same were not to be taken into consideration for the purpose of computation of the loss of dependency. I would not agree. Anything coming to the hands of an employee for the benefit of the family has to be taken into consideration to compute the loss of dependency. I am fortified in this view by a judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava, 1 (2008) ACC 162 (SC). Thus, the loss of dependency comes to `14,85,162/- (`2,15,024 + 5000/- + 50% x 1/2 x 9).
7. On adding a sum of `25,000/- towards loss of love and affection, `10,000/- each towards funeral expenses and loss to estate, the overall compensation comes to `15,30,162/-.
8. In the instant case, there is no Cross-Appeal or Cross-Objections by the Respondents(Claimants). In the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Mamta Rani & Ors., MAC APP.629/2010, decided on 06.09.2012 this Court noticed the Supreme Court judgments in Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 274; Ibrahim v. Raju, AIR 2012 SC 534; New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Gopali & Ors., Civil Appeal No.5179 of 2012 decided on 05.07.2012 and a judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Komal & Ors., MANU/DE/2870/2012, and held that the Court can increase the compensation without the Claimants filing any Cross Appeal or Cross Objections.
9. The enhanced compensation of `5,28,162/- shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum. The Appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest with the UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch within six weeks and shall be equally apportioned amongst the Respondents No.1 and 2. 75% of the enhanced amount shall be held in Fixed Deposit for a period of three years and rest shall be released on deposit.
10. The compensation already deposited in pursuance of the order dated 15.03.2010 shall be released in terms of the orders passed by the Claims Tribunal.
11. The Appeal is dismissed.
12. Statutory amount of `25,000/-, if any, shall be released to the Appellant Insurance Company.
13. Pending Applications stand disposed of.
NOVEMBER 07, 2012 pst (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE