CIVIL APPEAL 1030 of 1998 on 2 June 1997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH

F.A.O. No. 1030 of 1998Date of decision: February 10, 2015

Ajaib Kaur and others

….Appellants

Versus

State of Himachal Pardesh and others

….Respondents

Coram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh Present:Mr. Manpreet Singh Longia, Advocate, for the appellants Respondent no. 1 – service dispensed with Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for respondent nos. 2 & 3

Fateh Deep Singh, J.

Claimants feeling aggrieved over the award dated 2.6.1997 ofthe learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar has come up in thisappeal.

Heard Mr. Manpreet Singh Longia, Advocate, for the appellants and Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for respondent nos. 2 & 3.

On account of destruction of the records not much can beappreciated due to lack of evidence before this Court but in the light of thesubmissions of the two sides, the findings on issue no. 1 as regards themanner of the accident that it was due to rash and negligent driving ofHRTC Bus No. HP-37-0339 by respondent Hem Raj driver has led to thedeath of Harbhajan Singh on 28.3.1996 around 7 PM and which findingshave since been attained finality.

The lone contention of counsel for the appellants is over thedenial of compensation under the conventional heads and lower applicationof the multiplier. It is not put to question that the deceased at the time ofaccident was aged around 38 years earning Rs 1500/- per month which hasalso been assessed by the Tribunal in the capacity of daily wager. However,learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3[rd] of these earnings and in viewof judgment in New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Gopali and others, 2012 (3) RCR (Civil) 818, keeping in view the socio-economicstatus 1/4[th] needs to be deducted and thus in all eventuality the deceasedmust be contributing Rs 1125/- per month to the running of the house-hold.Therefore, the annual dependency comes to Rs 13,500/-. Keeping in viewthe admitted age of the deceased as per Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 (6) SCC 121, multiplier of 15 ought to have been applied and learned Tribunal has erred in applying multiplier of 12. Therefore, compensation comes to Rs 202500/-. Thefamily has lost their bread earner, wife her husband, thus loss of consortiumand the children their father protector and thus must be compensatedalongwith widowed mother of the deceased for the immeasurable loss oflove and affection and though no amount of compensation can assuage thefeeling of wrong done. However, by some guess work and hypotheticalcalculations, a sum of Rs 2 lacs is awarded under the conventional headsincluding funeral expenses. Thus, total compensation comes to Rs402500/- (Rupees Four lacs, two thousand and five hundred only). Theclaimants are also entitled for interest on enhanced compensation amount@ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the appeal till realization.Interim compensation paid, if any, shall be adjusted. Rest of thestipulations laid down by the Tribunal need not be disturbed. However, ifany of the minor has attained the age of majority, their share shall not beresorted to by way of FDR.

With the aforesaid modification in the impugned award, thepresent appeal is allowed.

February 10, 2015 'tiwana'

(Fateh Deep Singh)Judge