Punjab-Haryana High CourtBala Devi & Anr vs Surjeet Singh & Ors on 15 November, 2018Author:Lisa GillBench:Lisa GillFAO No.409 of 2014(O&M)                                                     [1]




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT
                          CHANDIGARH

                                                       FAO No. 409 of 2014(O&M)
                                             Date of Decision: November 15 , 2018.


Bala Devi and another                           ...... APPELLANT (s)
            Versus
Surjeet Singh and others                        ...... RESPONDENT (s)


CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:    Mr. Gaurav Sethi, Advocate
            for the appellants.

            Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate
            for respondent No.3.

            Mr. Hirdeyjeet Singh, Advocate for
            Mr. Gagandeep Singh, Advocate
            for respondent No.5.

            Mr. D.K.Dogra, Advocate
            for respondent No.6.
                               *****
            1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
               the judgment?
            2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
            3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?
                               *****

LISA GILL, J.This appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of

compensation awarded to them by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Ambala (for short, the 'Tribunal') vide impugned award dated 03.10.2013 on

account of death of Ashok Kumar in a motor vehicle accident.Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the case are that, the


                                    1 of 4::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 21:25:05 :::FAO No.409 of 2014(O&M)                                                        [2]claimants, who are parents of the deceased, filed a petition underSection 166of

the Motor Vehicles Act (for short, the 'Act') seeking compensation on account of

the death of their son Ashok Kumar, who lost his life in a motor vehicle accident

which took place on 16.09.2011. FIR No.312 dated 16.09.2011, underSections

279/337/304AIPC, Police Station Baldev Nagar was registered against

respondent No.1, driver of the offending vehicle.            The learned Tribunal on

consideration of the facts and evidence on record held that the accident in

question took place due to the rash and negligent driving of truck bearing

registration No. HR-38K-8582 by respondent No.1-Surjeet Singh. There is no

challenge to the finding of the learned Tribunal in this respect and the same has

attained finality.The learned Tribunal awarded a total sum of `4,40,000/- as

compensation to the claimants vide impugned award dated 03.10.2013. Income

of the deceased was assessed as `5,000/- per month. Deduction of 50% on

account of personal expenses was effected.             Multiplier of 14 was applied.

`20,000/- on account of transportation and funeral expenses was awarded.Learned counsel for the appellants submits that increment on account

of future prospects has not been granted. He further submits that multiplier of 14

has been wrongly applied and meagre amount has been awarded under the

conventional heads. It is thus prayed that the amount of compensation awarded to

the appellants be enhanced accordingly.Learned counsel for the respondents however prays that the

impugned award does not call for further enhancement of the compensation as the

same is reasonable and justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.2 of 4::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 21:25:05 :::FAO No.409 of 2014(O&M)                                                        [3]I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through

the file.The deceased, who was 24 years old at the time of the accident, is

averred to be a carpenter contractor, earning `12,000/- per month. Except a bald

statement of PW2 Bala Devi (appellant No.1), there is no evidence on record to

indicate that deceased-Ashok Kumar was earning an income higher than `5,000/-

per month as has been assessed by the learned Tribunal. Deduction at the rate of

50% on account of personal expenses has been correctly effected.Increase in

income at the rate of 40% on account of loss of future prospects is required to be

afforded keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court inNational

Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(16) SCC 680.

The matter regarding application of multiplier while assessing the compensation

is no longer res integra.The Hon'ble Supreme Court inMunna Lal Jain v.

Vipin Kumar Sharma, (2015) 6 SCC 347 has specifically held that the

multiplier is to be applied with reference to the age of the deceased.               The

deceased was admittedly 24 years old at the time of the accident. Therefore,

multiplier of 18 is required to be applied instead of 14. Instead of `20,000/-

awarded by the learned Tribunal on account of transportation and funeral

expenses, the claimants are entitled to `15,000/- each towards funeral expenses

and loss of estate.A sum of `40,000/- each on account of loss of filial

consortium is awarded in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court inMagma General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram

& Ors., in Civil Appeal No.9581 of 2018 decided on 18.09.2018.Appellants-claimants    are,     thus,   entitled   to   the   amount     of


                                    3 of 4::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 21:25:05 :::FAO No.409 of 2014(O&M)                                                             [4]compensation which is re-worked as under:-Sr.No. Heads of Claim                        Amount
               1.     Income                              5000 p.m.
                                                          i.e. `60,000/- per annum2.     Total income after addition at the 60,000 + (60,000 x 40%)
                      rate of 40% on account of future = 84,000
                      prospects3.     Net income after 50% deduction      84,000 - (84,000 x 1/2)
                      on account of personal expenses     = 42,0004.     Total dependancy after applying     (42,000 x 18) = 7,56,000
                      a multiplier of 185.     Loss of estate                      15,0006.     Funeral expenses                    15,0007.     Loss of filial consortium           40,000 x 2 = 80,000
                                          Grand Total     `8,66,000/-Finding of the learned Tribunal regarding discharge of the liability

by respondent No.3 - Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. is upheld.Needless to say, the amount already awarded by the learned Tribunal

shall stand deducted from the compensation as detailed above. Claimants shall

be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount at the rate of 7.5% per annum from

the date of filing of the petition till realization. Ratio of apportionment amongst

the claimants as determined by the learned Tribunal shall remain the same.Appeal is accordingly disposed of.( LISA GILL )
November 15 , 2018.                                           JUDGE
'om'

                    Whether speaking/reasoned:          Yes/No
                    Whether reportable:                 Yes/No




                                       4 of 4::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 21:25:05 :::