MAC.APP./714/2010 of GIRISH KUMAR Vs RAJ VIR & ORS

UNREPORTED

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ MAC. APP. No. 714/2010

GIRISH KUMAR

..... Appellant Through: Mr. R.K.Bachchan, Advocate.

versus

RAJ VIR & ORS

..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Niraj Singh, Advocate for the respondent No.3.

Date of Decision : April 26, 2011

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed

to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?

O R R(ORAL)

: REVA KHETRAPAL, J.

1.By way of this appeal the appellant seeks to impugn the judgment and award dated 16.04.2010 passed in MACT No. 21/2009 titled ‘Shri Girish Kumar versus Raj Vir and Ors.’judgment and award dated 16.04.2010 passed in MACT No. 21/2009 titled ‘Shri Girish Kumar versus Raj Vir and Ors.’

2.The claim petition was filed by Shri Girish Kumar, the appellant herein, who had suffered grievous injuries in roadside accident, which occurred on 29.11.2008 at Yamuna appellant herein, who had suffered grievous injuries in roadside accident, which occurred on 29.11.2008 at Yamuna

MAC.APP.714/2010Page 1 of 4

Vihar, C-Block Bus Stand, Delhi, against the driver, the owner and the insurer of the offending bus bearing No. DL-1PB-1888, which culminated in the passing of the impugned award dated 16.4.2010 in the sum of ` 5,49,976/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum in favour of the appellant and against the respondent No.3. and the insurer of the offending bus bearing No. DL-1PB-1888, which culminated in the passing of the impugned award dated 16.4.2010 in the sum of ` 5,49,976/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum in favour of the appellant and against the respondent No.3.

3.Although number of grounds are urged in the appeal, the sole ground pressed by Mr. R.K.Bachchan, the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of the hearing of the present appeal is that the deduction of 1/3[rd] from the income towards the personal expenses and maintenance of the deceased could not have been made by the learned Tribunal while calculating the income of the deceased and the amount of compensation payable to the injured for prospective loss of income. ground pressed by Mr. R.K.Bachchan, the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of the hearing of the present appeal is that the deduction of 1/3[rd] from the income towards the personal expenses and maintenance of the deceased could not have been made by the learned Tribunal while calculating the income of the deceased and the amount of compensation payable to the injured for prospective loss of income.

4.Mr. Niraj Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, though sought to support the award, did not deny that the deduction of 1/3[rd] cannot in law be made while computing the prospective loss of income in case where the victim claims though sought to support the award, did not deny that the deduction of 1/3[rd] cannot in law be made while computing the prospective loss of income in case where the victim claims

MAC.APP.714/2010Page 2 of 4

compensation for the injuries sustained by him in road accident.

5.The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Raj Kumar versus Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 SCC 343’ has clearly distinguished the compensation payable to an injured claimant from loss of dependency awarded to dependent family members of the deceased in the case of fatal accident. While in the former case, what is to be calculated is the future loss of earning of the claimant, payable to the claimant himself, in the latter case, it is the loss of future earnings of the deceased, payable to the dependent family members, which is to be calculated. As such, no deduction towards the personal expenses is warranted while calculating compensation payable to an injured claimant on account of future loss of earnings. Kumar and Another (2011) 1 SCC 343’ has clearly distinguished the compensation payable to an injured claimant from loss of dependency awarded to dependent family members of the deceased in the case of fatal accident. While in the former case, what is to be calculated is the future loss of earning of the claimant, payable to the claimant himself, in the latter case, it is the loss of future earnings of the deceased, payable to the dependent family members, which is to be calculated. As such, no deduction towards the personal expenses is warranted while calculating compensation payable to an injured claimant on account of future loss of earnings.

6.In view of the aforesaid, the award is modified to the extent that the amount of compensation shall be calculated without deduction of 1/3[rd] made by the learned Tribunal. Thus calculated, the prospective loss of income of the deceased works out to ` 5,63,448/- instead of ` 3,75,564/- as calculated that the amount of compensation shall be calculated without deduction of 1/3[rd] made by the learned Tribunal. Thus calculated, the prospective loss of income of the deceased works out to ` 5,63,448/- instead of ` 3,75,564/- as calculated

MAC.APP.714/2010Page 3 of 4

by the learned Tribunal. The award, accordingly, stands enhanced and the total compensation payable to the appellant shall be in the sum of ` 7,37,860/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the institution of the petition by the appellant till the realization. The respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with up-to-date interest with the Registrar General of this Court within one month from today by way of crossed-cheque.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

April 26, 2011 ak

REVA KHETRAPAL (JUDGE)

MAC.APP.714/2010Page 4 of 4