NARAINGARH SUGAR MILLS LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The court recalculated the loss of dependency by considering the deceased's salary, deductions for personal expenses, and income tax. Non-pecuniary damages were also added.
What were the facts?
The appellants sought enhancement of compensation for the death of Mahesh Kumar, a Delhi Police Constable, in a motor accident. The deceased was 36 years old at the time of his death.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the enhancement of compensation awarded for the death of a motor accident victim, involving the calculation of loss of dependency and non-pecuniary damages.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
MAC. APP. 58/2011
Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 27th April, 2012 + MAC.APP. 58/2011
NISHA DEVI & ORS ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Munish Kumar Sharma,
Advocate
versus
KRISHAN AVTAR & ORS ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL
J U D G M E N T
G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The Appellants seek enhancement of compensation of `15,86,870/- awarded for the death of Mahesh Kumar who died in a motor accident which occurred on 31.10.2007. 2. Mahesh Kumar was aged about 36 years and was employed in Delhi Police as a Constable. His gross salary on account of the revised Pay Scale on implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006 on the date of his death i.e. 31.10.2007 was `15,092/-.
MAC. APP. 58/2011
Page 2 of 3 3. It is agreed by the parties that transport allowance, washing allowance and conveyance allowance totaling `160/- being personal to the deceased were liable to be deducted towards the payment made as they were incidental to his employment. 4. Considering the number of dependents to be five on the date of the accident and thus making deduction of one-fourth towards personal and living expenses, excluding `1937/- from the liability towards income tax (being House Rent Allowance), the loss of dependency comes to ` 29,56,230/- (`14,932/- x 12 – `4,000/- (income tax) + 50% x 3/4 x 15). 5. I would further add a sum of `55,000/- towards non-pecuniary heads i.e. `25,000/- towards Loss of Love and Affection, `10,000/- each towards Loss of Consortium, Loss to Estate and Funeral Expenses. The overall compensation thus comes to ` 30,11,230/-. 6. The compensation is thus enhanced from `15,86,870/- to `30,11,230/-. The compensation is enhanced to `14,24,360/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till its deposit in the Court. 7. 10% each of the enhanced compensation along with the proportionate interest shall be paid to the Appellants No.2, 3 and 5. Rest 70% of the enhanced compensation along with the proportionate interest shall enure for the benefit of the First Appellant.
MAC. APP. 58/2011
Page 3 of 3 8. Respondent No.3 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Limited shall make the deposit of the enhanced amount along with the interest in the name of the respective Appellants in UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, New Delhi within six weeks. 9. The Appeal is allowed in above terms.
(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE APRIL 27, 2012 vk
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026