ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PHULO DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurance Company challenged the order dated 4.7.2007 passed by learned Judge, MACT, new Delhi in Suit No.259/2006. The respondents no. 1 to 8 herein are legal heirs of deceased Harish Chander @ Hari Chander who was employed as a driver of the truck of respondent no.9 Krishan Gupta. On 6.5.2000, the deceased was driving the truck and was on his way to Delhi. On the way, one Rampal, an ex employee of the truck owner Krishan Gupta with his two friends met Hari Chander and requested for lift. The deceased Hari Chander obliged them. When the truck reached near Prem Dham, Village-Baldhana at about 10 pm, Rampal along with his accomplices attacked on Hari Chander and gave him multiple stab injuries resulting into his death. His dead body was thrown away. Rampal along with his friends fled away with the vehicles as well as money belonging to Hari Chander. A case FIR No. 164/2000 was lodged under Sections 302/394/411 IPC. Respondents no. 1 to 7 who are the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition seeking compensation being Suit No.289/2000 against the owner of the truck Mr. Krishan Gupta and the appellant herein, the insurer of the truck. Both the respondents objected to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that Hari Chander was murdered on account of his personal enmity with the accused persons and none of the respondents were liable for any compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. Similarly Mr. Krishan Gupta also took the plea that the proper forum for the claimants was to approach the Court under Workmen Compensation Act. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following two issues:

(2.) Relying upon the judgment of Rita Devi v New India Assurance Company, 2000 5 JT 355, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.5,17,480/- to the dependants/ claimants of deceased Hari Chander. The said compensation comprised of Rs.4,92,480/- on account of loss of dependency of the claimants/ dependents; Rs.15,000/- on account of consortium and Rs.10,000/- on account of funeral expenses. Since there was no cogent evidence led with regard to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal took the prescribed minimum wages of a skilled worker as the basis of calculation of compensation and taking note of the fact that minimum wages would have increased to double considering the age of the deceased as 40 years. The Tribunal assessed the average monthly income of the deceased to Rs.4275/- per month. Since the deceased had left behind as many as 8 dependents, the Tribunal made a deduction of 1/5 th from the average monthly income of the deceased as towards his personal and living expenses. In this manner, the Tribunal calculated the loss of financial dependency of the dependents to be Rs.3420 per month or Rs.41,040/- per annum. He applied the multiplier of 12 and arrived at a figure of Rs.4,92,480/- as loss of financial dependency of the dependents.

(3.) The Insurance Company assailed the impugned award mainly on the ground that it was not a case of death of deceased Hari Chander in a motor accident, but it was a case of murder simplicitor by the person known to him and his friends. It was submitted that the reliance upon the case of Rita Devi (supra) by the learned Tribunal was misplaced. The impugned award was also challenged on the ground that the learned Tribunal has erroneously taken the double of the minimum wages in arriving at the average monthly income of the deceased.