$~6 & 7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC011731762016 + MAC.APP. 524/2016 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Salil Paul, Mr. Sahil Paul & Mr. Harmeet Singh Phillip, Advs. versus SHEORAJ SINGH & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Mr. Ritik Singh, Advs. for R-1. 7 # CNR No. DLHC013402322018 + MAC.APP. 891/2018 SHEORAJ SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Mr. Ritik Singh, Advs. versus SURESH & ORS ( THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ) .....Respondents Through: Mr. Salil Paul, Mr. Sahil Paul & Mr. Harmeet Singh Phillip, Advs. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL O R D E R % 11.08.2026 1. These cross-appeals have been filed in respect of an award dated 10th This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:24 May 2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma Courts (‘MACT/Tribunal’), in MAC no. 45/2016, awarding compensation of Rs. 6,76,758/- along with interest at 9% per annum. 2. MAC.APP. 524/2016 has been filed on behalf of the Insurance Company, whereas the MAC.APP. 891/2018 has been filed on behalf of the injured/claimant. 3. The accident in question occurred on 14th July 2013, when the injured claimant was going on foot from Khoda Colony towards Indirapuram. He was run over by a tanker bearing registration No. HR-55P-2481. As a result of the accident, he sustained grievous injuries and was certified with 89% permanent disability, in relation to the left upper limb. 4. The Tribunal assessed functional disability at 70%, taking into account that the injured was working as a salesperson. The Insurance Company contends that the functional disability ought to have been assessed at half of the 89% permanent disability, whereas the claimant contends that it ought to have been assessed at 100%. 5. In this regard, the assessment made by the MACT in paragraph 18 requires attention. MACT noted that the petitioner will not be able to enjoy or live his life like a normal human being. Further, the Tribunal noted that the injured will remain unable to work in the manner as he was doing earlier and accordingly, the functional disability was assessed at 70%. 6. Taking into account the observations made by the MACT, this Court is of the opinion that the assessment of functional disability at 70% is not amiss. Considering that the claimant was working as a salesperson and that his left arm has been rendered permanently paralysed, it would be difficult for him to continue pursuing his vocation in the same manner as before. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:24 7. The second issue pertains to the assessment of income. The MACT awarded income on the basis of minimum wages of an unskilled worker in Uttar Pradesh, i.e. Rs. 4,975/- per month, whereas the claimant contended that he was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month while working as a salesman with M/s H.R. Finance, Gupta Complex, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. 8. Mr. S.N. Parashar points out to the testimony of PW2, Kapil Bansal, marketing executive of M/s H.R. Finance, who produced a certificate issued by the proprietor, which states that the claimant had been working with the organization as salesman and had left its services in July 2013, i.e. after the accident. However, since there was no record of when the claimant had joined the organisation or whether his employment was contractual or permanent in nature, the MACT did not consider the claimed income of Rs. 12,000/-. However, no reasoning has been provided by the MACT in the impugned award for adopting the minimum wages of an unskilled worker in Uttar Pradesh as benchmark income. 9. The claimant was a resident of Delhi, and although the duration of his employment could not be proved, there was material on record indicating that he was working as a salesman in Delhi. Therefore, at the very least, his income ought to have been assessed on the basis of the minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker in Delhi, which were Rs. 9,386/- per month. 10. Further, it is contended that no future prospects were awarded. In line of principles enunciated in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680, and considering that the claimant was 52 years of age on the date of the accident, future prospects are awarded at 10%. 11. Accordingly, the revised computation is as under: This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:24 Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal Awarded by this Court PECUNIARY LOSS 1. Expenditure on Medical Bills and medical treatment (A) Rs. 17,279/- Rs. 17,279/- 2. Expenditure on conveyance and special diet (B) Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 20,000/- 3. Attendant charges (C) Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- 4. Income of injured per month(E) Rs.4,975.86/- Rs. 9,386/- 5. Loss of Income (12 months) (D) Rs. 59,710 Rs. 1,12,632/- 6. Add: Future prospects (F) NIL 10% 7. Multiplier (G) 11 11 8. Functional disability (H) 70% 70% 9. Loss of future income/future earnings [(E+F) x 12 x G x H] = (I) Rs.4,59,769/- Rs. 9,53,993.04/- NON-PECUNIARY LOSS 10. Pain and suffering (J) Rs. 70,000 Rs. 70,000 11. Loss of amenities of life (K) Rs. 40,000 Rs. 40,000 12. Total compensation (A + B + C + D + I+ J+ K) = L Rs.6,76,758/- Rs. 12,23,904.04/- (Rounded to Rs. 12,23,904/-) 13. Interest awarded 9% per annum 9% per annum 14. Enhanced compensation Rs. 5,47,146/- 12. Accordingly, the compensation is enhanced by Rs. 5,47,146/-. 13. Enhanced compensation along with accrued interest shall be deposited by the Insurance Company with the MACT within six weeks. 14. Upon such deposit, the enhanced compensation shall be released to the claimants within two weeks thereafter, in a lump sum, considering that the present appeal pertains to an accident that occurred in 2013. 15. Vide order dated 18th July 2016, the Insurance Company was directed This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:24 to deposit the entire awarded amount along with accrued interest with UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, subject to which stay was granted. 16. By order dated 07th September, 2016, yearly fixed deposits of Rs. 80,000/- each were made for periods ranging from 1 to 10 years. Since the entire period of 10 years has now elapsed, the original compensation amount kept in fixed deposits shall be released to the claimant in a lump sum. 17. Statutory deposit, if any, shall be refunded to appellant/Insurance Company along with the accrued interest. 18. Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. 19. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J AUGUST 11, 2026/vs/bp This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:37:24