Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 52 (PNJ)

JAI PARKASH ALIAS PARKASH v. MOHAMMAD YUSUF

2013-01-17

M.JEYAPAUL

body2013
JUDGMENT : M. Jeyapaul, J. FAO No. 1658 of 2011 was filed by the parents of the deceased who were in the age group of 36 years praying for enhancement of compensation for the death of their son Mohit aged 17 years. The Tribunal having considered the age of the deceased Mohit as 17 years who was a 10th class student at the time of the accident simply awarded a lump sum amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- as compensation without applying the multiplier method, arriving at the notional income of the deceased. 2. FAO No. 4508 of 2011 was filed by the appellants who were in the age group of 45 years aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of their son Akash aged 18 years. The Tribunal without applying the multiplier method arriving at the notional income of the deceased simply awarded a lump sum amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- as compensation. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would vehemently submit that in both the cases which were taken up for common disposal, multiplier method should have been adopted to arrive at the loss of dependency. Even as per the minimum wages fixed by the State of Haryana during the second half of 2009, during which period the accident took place, a sum of Rs. 3940/- was fixed as the minimum wages for an unskilled labourer. At least that amount should have been taken as the notional income of the deceased Mohit and Akash who were in the age group of 17 years and 18 years respectively. It is his further submission that the future prospects of the deceased also will have to be taken into consideration while arriving at the loss of dependency. Nothing was awarded towards loss of estate, funeral expenses and transportation of the dead body, it was further argued. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance company would submit that both the deceased were bachelors without having any earning capacity. As there was no fixed wage earned by the deceased bachelors, the Tribunal has rightly awarded lump sum amount. It is her further submission that nothing could be awarded towards future prospects when the deceased had no earning capacity at the time of accident. As there was no fixed wage earned by the deceased bachelors, the Tribunal has rightly awarded lump sum amount. It is her further submission that nothing could be awarded towards future prospects when the deceased had no earning capacity at the time of accident. She would also submit that 50% of the earning will have to be deducted, in case the Court comes to the conclusion that the multiplier method will have to be adopted for arriving at the loss of dependency. 5. In my considered view, the Tribunal should have applied the multiplier method to arrive at the loss of dependency. At least the minimum wages fixed by the State of Haryana for an unskilled labourer should have been taken as the monthly earning capacity of bachelors aged 17 and 18 years. 6. The deceased Mohit was 17 years old. He was doing 10th class. The deceased Akash who was 18 years at the time when the accident took place. In about 2-3 years they would have started earning more amount than the minimum wages fixed for the labourers. At least a sum of Rs. 3940/- being the minimum wages for an unskilled labourer in the State of Haryana during the second half of 2009 will have to be fixed as the income of the deceased Mohit and Akash. The parents of Mohit were in the age group of 36 years. Therefore, the multiplier of 15 will have to be adopted to arrive at the loss of dependency of the deceased Mohit. The parents of Akash were in the age group of 45 years. The multiplier of 14 will have to be adopted to arrive at the loss of dependency on the death of Akash. 7. As both the deceased Mohit and Akash died as bachelors leaving behind their parents as claimants, 50% of their earning will have to be deducted towards their personal expenses. 8. Just because the deceased had not been receiving any fixed wages, the entitlement of the claimants towards future prospects of the deceased cannot be negatived. In other words the very same wage of Rs. 3940/- cannot be fixed for the entire period of 14-15 long years. The deceased would definitely have lost their future prospects of increase in their earning capacity. 9. The claimants in both the cases are entitled to at least a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. In other words the very same wage of Rs. 3940/- cannot be fixed for the entire period of 14-15 long years. The deceased would definitely have lost their future prospects of increase in their earning capacity. 9. The claimants in both the cases are entitled to at least a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 5000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5000/- towards transportation expenses. 10. In view of the above, a sum of Rs. 4,60,980/- (Rs. 3940 + 30% thereof being Rs. 1182 = Rs. 5122 minus 50% thereof being Rs. 2561 = Rs. 2561 x 12 = Rs. 30732 x 15 = Rs. 4,60,980/-) towards loss of dependency Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- towards transportation charges, in aggregate a sum of Rs. 4,80,980/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% on the enhanced amount of the compensation from the date of petition till the date of realisation is awarded. The rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal on the amount awarded by it and the mode of apportionment adopted by the Tribunal stands confirmed. 11. With the above modification in the quantum of compensation, the appeal stands partly allowed. 12. In view of the above, a sum of Rs. 4,30,248/- (Rs. 3940 + 30% thereof being Rs. 1182 = Rs. 5122 minus 50% thereof being Rs. 2561 = Rs. 2561 x 12 = Rs. 30732 x 14 = Rs. 4,30,248/-) towards loss of dependency Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- towards transportation charges, in aggregate a sum of Rs. 4,50,248/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% on the enhanced amount of the compensation from the date of petition till the date of realisation is awarded. The rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal on the amount awarded by it and the mode of apportionment adopted by the Tribunal stands confirmed. With the above modification, in the quantum of compensation, the appeal stands partly allowed.