Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 587 (PNJ)

Bhateri v. Sardar Jagdeep Singh

2003-04-24

HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2003
JUDGMENT H.S. Bedi, J. - This appeal arises out of an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani dated 30.5.1985 in which Daya Nand aged 39-1/2 years, a driver of a four wheeler, was killed on 27.4.1984 as a result of a collision with Truck No. PJI-4375, being driven by Kamaldeep Singh, respondent. On a claim petition filed by his widow, his minor children and his mother the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 600/- and after deducting 1/3 as his personal expenses, determined the annual dependency of the claimants on the deceased at Rs. 4800/- and by applying a multiplier, of 12, awarded a sum of Rs. 57,600/- by way of compensation along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation. 2. Aggrieved thereby the appellant-claimants have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. This case had earlier been taken up several times but could not be settled either before the Lok Adalat or before this Court on account of non- availability of the appellants counsel, who apparently belongs to Bhiwani. I, therefore, do not deem it appropriate to delay the matter any further. 4. As no appeal has been filed by the respondents, the negligence on the part of the driver of the truck, which was involved in the accident killing Daya Nand, is confirmed. 5. I am also of the opinion that some increase in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is called for. Even assuming the dependency of the claimants on the deceased at Rs. 400/- per month as determined by the Tribunal to be the correct one, a multiplier, of 16 in this case ought to have been applied as the deceased was 39-1/2 years of age at the time of his death. As per this calculation, the compensation payable to the claimants would then be Rs. 400 x 12 x 16 = Rs. 76,800/-, which is rounded off to Rs. 77,000/-. 6. However, a perusal of the High Court record reveals that the matter had earlier been taken up before the Lok Adalat wherein Mr. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company had stated that the Company was willing to enhance the compensation given by the Tribunal by Rs. 15,000/-. 76,800/-, which is rounded off to Rs. 77,000/-. 6. However, a perusal of the High Court record reveals that the matter had earlier been taken up before the Lok Adalat wherein Mr. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company had stated that the Company was willing to enhance the compensation given by the Tribunal by Rs. 15,000/-. This Court was, however, of the opinion that the amount offered was inadequate and the case was accordingly adjourned to 20.3.1990. It was, however, taken up on 21.3.1990, when Mr. L.M. Suri, the learned Senior Advocate appearing with Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate stated that the Company was willing to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation. No final settlement could, however, be arrived at even on that date as the appellants counsel was not available. The case was then adjourned to 24.3.1990 to await his appearance but as he did not appear even on that date, the Lok Adalat had no option but to list the case before the Court. 7. It is in these circumstances that the matter has come up before this Court. 8. I find that as the learned counsel for the Insurance Company had made a statement on 21.3.1990, I deem it appropriate that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation should be given to the legal heirs of the deceased as that would be a just and fair amount. It is, however, made clear that as the compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been fixed on account of the statement made by the learned counsel, no interest would be payable to the claimants on the amount of Rs. 23,000/- i.e., the amount in excess of Rs. 77,000/-, which would have been payable as per the calculations made above. The appeal stands allowed in the above terms. As the appellants have remained unrepresented even today, a copy of the judgment be sent to them under registered cover free of costs. Appeal allowed.