Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 204 (PNJ)

National Insurance Company v. Surinder Singh

2012-02-03

JITENDRA CHAUHAN

body2012
JUDGMENT Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J.: (Oral) - CM No.7164 CII of 2011 in FAO No. 2179 of 2011 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 37 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 2. Application stands disposed of accordingly. CM No.32391 CII of 2010 in FAO No.7352 of 2010. 3. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, delay of 16 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Application stands disposed of. FAO No. 7352 of 2010 and FAO No. 2179 of 2011 5. This judgment shall dispose of two appeals i.e. FAO no. 7352 of 2010, filed by the Insurance Company and FAO No. 2179 of 2011, filed by the claimants. Both these appeals have been filed against the common impugned Award dated 25.8.2010, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (for short ‘the Tribunal’), vide which the claim petition was allowed and the Insurance Company, the driver and the owner were jointly and severally held liable to pay the compensation. For the sake of brevity, the facts have been taken from FAO No. 7352 of 2010. 6. The brief facts giving rise to the case are that on 15.12.2008, Deepak Nain, Hardeep Singh and some other students were boarded the three wheeler, being driven by Deep Chand (since deceased), for going to village Golpura Engineer College, from Barwala. Near MLB electric Brick Kiln of village Mouli, one truck bearing registration No.HP-12C-6931, being driven by Khem Chand, in a rash and negligent manner, collided with the said three wheeler. In the said accident, the driver of the three wheeler as well as all the four occupants, who were students, died. The dependents of the deceased filed separate the claim petitions, which were consolidated and decided by a common award dated 25.8.2010. The present appeal has been filed in MACT case No. 72 of 2009, filed by Surinder Singh and another on account of death of their son Deepan Nain. The learned Tribunal allowed the said claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.9,10,000/- and ordered to be paid by the Insurance Company, driver and owner of the offending truck. 7. The Insurance Company by filing FAO No.7352 of 2010, challenged the impugned award on the quantum of compensation. The learned Tribunal allowed the said claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.9,10,000/- and ordered to be paid by the Insurance Company, driver and owner of the offending truck. 7. The Insurance Company by filing FAO No.7352 of 2010, challenged the impugned award on the quantum of compensation. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company asserted that the income of the deceased assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the higher side. He further states that the deceased had not been earning anything. There is no objective basis for arriving of the income of the deceased. 8. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants, has stated that the deceased was doing a student of Civil Engineering (Diploma) at Swami Devi Dayal, Engineer College, Gollpura (Panchkula). He was in the 2nd year of the diploma course. He was the only son of his parents. Moreover, the amount under the conventional heads is on the lower side. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case record. 10. Admittedly, the deceased was a student of 2nd Year, Civil Engineer (Diploma). He was of 18 years of age. He was stated to be the only son of his parents. Though there is no straightjacket formula to quantify the income of the deceased, however, certain objective factors could always be taken into consideration while deciding the compensation. In the present case, the deceased was 18 years of age, he had a good academic record, on the basis of which, he was admitted in the Civil Engineering (diploma course) and in fact, had passed the first year and thus, it could be safely assumed that the deceased was a bright student. The deceased was in the process of acquiring a professional degree, for which there is always a demand in the market. Therefore, keeping in view the qualification acquired by the deceased, it cannot be said that the income of the deceased assessed by the learned Tribunal was excessive or on the higher side. 11. The untimely death of the Deepak Nain was a great shock to his family. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded under the conventional heads is enhanced from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.20000/-, which would meet the ends of justice. 12. No other point has been raised by the learned counsel for the parties. 13. The untimely death of the Deepak Nain was a great shock to his family. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded under the conventional heads is enhanced from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.20000/-, which would meet the ends of justice. 12. No other point has been raised by the learned counsel for the parties. 13. However, there is no merit in the appeal i.e. FAO No. 7352 of 2010, filed by the Insurance Company. 14. The enhanced amount i.e. Rs.10000/- shall be paid to the claimants, in the manner indicated in the impugned Award, within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment, failing which, the same shall carry interest @7.5% per annum from the date of the filing of the appeal, till its realisation. 15. Accordingly, FAO No. 7352 of 2010, filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed and FAO No. 2179 of 2011, filed by the claimants is partly allowed and the impugned Award is modified to the above extent. ------------