1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20973 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 33974 OF 2015] NAVJYOT SINGH . & ORS.                       Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS D.T.C. & ORS.                                Respondent(s)

with CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20974 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 9834 OF 2016]

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J. 1. Leave granted.

2. The main question arising for consideration in these appeals is with regard to the application for future  prospects.   The  other  question  is  on  the computation of income.

3. The  Constitution  Bench,  in  a  recent  Judgment dated  31.10.2017  in  National  Insurance  Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (SLP (C) No. 25590 of 2014 & Batch), has held that even in the case of self-employed persons, addition of income by way of future  prospects  is  permissible.   In  the  instant case, the deceased was aged 42 years and hence, as

2

per  the  guidelines,  it  is  not  in  dispute  that enhancement shall be at the rate of 25%.

4. There is a vast difference between the findings of the Tribunal and the High Court with regard to computation of income.  The Tribunal, on the basis of Income  Tax  Returns  filed  after  the  death  and  the evidence tendered by the colleagues, calculated the income  at Rs.  1,46,618/- per  month.  However, the High Court, having regard to the Income Tax Returns, entered a finding that the monthly income was only Rs. 59,250/-.

5. Having  heard  the  learned  counsel  appearing  on both  sides  and  having  gone  through  the  materials available  on  record,  we  are  of  the  view  that  a reasonable increase in the income is required in the instant case.  Of course, the appellants are entitled to 25% enhancement by way of future prospects.  On a rough and ready estimate, we are of the view that it will be just, fair, proper and reasonable to fix the compensation at Rs.75,00,000/-  (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs).  The same shall carry interest at the rate of 9% from the date of application.  The amount already paid  shall be  duly adjusted.   The  respondents are directed  to  deposit  the  amount  due  as  per  this Judgment within a period of three months from today.

3

6. In view of the above, the appeals are disposed of.     

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ AMITAVA ROY ]  

New Delhi; December 07, 2017.

4

ITEM NO.16               COURT NO.5               SECTION XIV                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)  No(s).  33974/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10-04-2015 in MACAP No. 887/2012 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) NAVJYOT SINGH . & ORS.                             Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS D.T.C. & ORS.                                      Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 9834/2016 (XIV) Date : 07-12-2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Counsel for the  parties Mr. Vikas Arora, Adv.  

Mr. Mohit Paul, Adv.  Ms. Radhika Arora, Adv.  Mr. Puneeth K. G., Adv.  Mr. Anugrah Niraj Ekka, Adv.  Mr. S. C. Duggal, Adv.   

                   Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR                     Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR     UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Leave granted.  The  civil  appeals  are  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed

non-reportable Judgment.   Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                              (RENU DIWAN)    COURT MASTER                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)

5