NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.   7032     OF 2019 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 33338 OF 2017)

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED …. APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

SATISH KUMAR VERMA AND ANOTHER …. RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

SANJIV KHANNA, J

Leave granted.

2. We have heard counsel  for  the appellant  – National  Insurance

Company Limited, but there is no appearance despite service on

behalf of Satish Kumar Verma and Indira Verma (respondent Nos.

1 and 2), father and mother of the deceased Amol Verma.

3. We do not see any justification and ground to interfere with the

findings  recorded  by  the  High  Court  of  Uttarakhand  in  adding

fellowship of Rs.12,000/- per month to the salary of Rs.3,000/- per

month  for  computing  the  loss  of  dependency.   The  Motor

Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 33338 of 2017 Page 1 of 4

Accidents  Claims  Tribunal  had  clearly  erred  in  excluding  the

fellowship  component  notwithstanding  the  Annual  Income

Certificate  issued  by  the  Indian  Institute  of  Technology  (IIT),

Roorkee, affirming that the deceased was being paid consolidated

fellowship as Fellow-‘A’ (Hydro Power).  Notably, late Amol Verma

was having an M.Tech degree and was working in one of the most

prestigious  engineering  institutes  in  the  country.   Given  this

background, salary of Rs.3,000/- per month would be ridiculously

low.  Entire compensation package has to be taken into account.

Thus, the High Court was right in computing annual income of the

deceased at Rs.3,00,000/- per annum by giving benefit of future

prospects. The High Court has also rightly applied the multiplier of

seventeen in  view of  the  decision  of  this  Court  in  M/s.  Royal

Sundaram Alliance  Insurance  Co.  Ltd.  v.  Mandala  Yadagiri

Goud and Others1.

4. However,  we agree with  the counsel  for  the appellant  that  the

deceased  being  a  bachelor,  50% deduction  should  have  been

made towards personal and other living expenses to compute the

dependency of parents, i.e. respondent Nos. 1 and 2.  In normal

course, the deceased would have got married and had children.

Deduction of 1/3rd annual income towards personal expenses in

the  present  case  is  not  appropriate  and  would  not  be  in 1 Civil Appeal No. 6600 of 2015 decided on 9th April 2019. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 33338 of 2017 Page 2 of 4

consonance  with  the  Constitution  Bench  judgment  in  National

Insurance  Company  Limited  v.  Pranay  Sethi  and  Another2,

which  affirms  the  view  in  Sarla  Verma  and  Others  v.  Delhi

Transport  Corporation  and  Another3.   Accordingly,  the

compensation  payable  towards  dependency  to  the  first  and

second respondents  would  get  reduced from Rs.34,00,000/-  to

Rs.25,50,000/-.

5. However, we do not find any good ground and reason to interfere

with  the  direction  given  by  the  High  Court  for  payment  of

Rs.1,00,000/-  towards  loss  of  love  and  affection  and  funeral

expenses  of  Rs.25,000/-.  The  reason  being,  this  is  an

extraordinary case wherein the first and second respondents have

lost a brilliant and young son who was barely 26 years of age.  We

would exercise our discretion not to reduce the amount awarded

as nothing has been paid for loss of filial consortium. We also do

not find any justification to interfere with the award of interest @

9% per annum in the facts of the present case.

6. Accordingly,  the total  quantum of  compensation payable by the

appellant  to  the  first  and  second  respondents  would  be

Rs.26,75,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of

2 (2017) 16 SCC 680 3 (2009) 6 SCC 121 Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 33338 of 2017 Page 3 of 4

filing of the claim petition till the actual date of payment.  Amounts

already paid would be adjusted.

7. The civil appeal is disposed of without any order as to costs.  

......................................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE)

......................................J. (SANJIV KHANNA)

NEW DELHI; SEPTEMBER 03, 2019.

Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 33338 of 2017 Page 4 of 4