The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sh. Ram Prakash Mishra & Ors. consisting of Justice Rekha Palli expounded that merely because the Claimants were unable to produce documentary evidence to show monthly income, the same does not justify the adoption of the lowest tier of minimum wage while computing the income.
Brief Facts:
This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by the insurer seeking to challenge the award passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Appellant assailed the quantum of compensation only qua the sum of Rs.1,01,148/- awarded towards loss of income and a sum of Rs.1,55,767/- awarded towards future loss of income.
Contentions of the Appellant:
It was contended that the Respondent was residing in Uttar Pradesh and therefore the minimum wages payable to a skilled person in Delhi could not have been taken as a yardstick for the grant of compensation to him, that too when he had not furnished any proof of his income.
Contentions of the Respondent:
It was contended that the Respondent being a law graduate with a long experience working at the Food Corporation of India would be earning much more than the monthly wages payable to a non-graduate skilled worker. While admitting that the monthly income of Rs.16,858/- considered by the learned tribunal for computing compensation was incorrect, he prayed that at least the minimum wages of Rs. 12,142/-, as applicable to a graduate skilled worker working in a clerical capacity be considered for computing the Respondent’s loss of income and future loss of income.
Observations of the Court:
The Bench observed that the Respondent was residing at Sultanpur in Delhi at the time of the accident.
The Court relied on Chandaram vs. Mukesh Kumar Yadav (2022 1 SCC 198) and noted that in case no documentary evidence is available, some guesswork has to be done. If there is no salary certificate provided then the minimum wage notification can be relied upon but the same cannot be the only parameter to fix the income of the deceased. It was opined that the inability to produce documentary evidence does not justify the adoption of the lowest tier of minimum wage while computing the income.
It was held that the Respondent’s plea that his monthly salary at the time of the accident be taken as Rs.12,142/- per month deserved to be accepted.
The decision of the Court:
The impugned award was, accordingly, modified by directing that the compensation towards loss of income and future loss would be computed by taking his monthly salary as Rs. 12,142/- instead of the income of Rs. 16,858/- taken into account by the learned Tribunal. Consequently, the compensation towards loss of income awarded to the Respondent was reduced from Rs.1,01,148/- to Rs.72,852/- and the future loss of income was reduced from Rs.1,55,767/- to Rs.1,12,192/-.
Accordingly, the application was disposed of.
Case Title: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sh. Ram Prakash Mishra & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Ms. Rekha Palli
Case No: MAC.APP. 211/2020
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. Mr. Sankar N. Sinha.
Advocates for Respondents: Advs. Mr. Varun Sarin & Ms. Parul Dutta
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure .
0 Comments