Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 10 (PNJ)

Sunita Devi v. Suraj Singh

2014-01-08

JITENDRA CHAUHAN

body2014
JUDGMENT Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J.:- CM-31166-CII-2011 Despite sufficient opportunity, no reply has been filed by the respondents. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 83 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned. FAO-7335-2011 1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant-appellants, seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur (for short ‘the Tribunal’), vide award dated 1.6.2011, on account of death of Darshan Lal, in a motor vehicular accident. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was 38 years of age at that time, as per the postmortem report Ex.A4. He left behind five dependents i.e. mother, wife and three children. In view of Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, [2009(3) Law Herald (SC) 2107] : 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, the multiplier of 15 and dependency of 3/4th should be taken. He further submits that the learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of consortium and funeral expenses. No interest has been awarded on the compensation amount. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company has not disputed the above facts. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. It is not disputed that the death of Darshan Lal occurred due to the injuries suffered by him in a road accident on 14.1.2009. As per postmortem report Ex.A4, he was 38 years of age at the time of death. He left behind five dependents. In 14 and 21 of Smt. Sarla Verma’s case, The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:- 14. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardized deductions. Having considered several subsequent decisions of this court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be onethird (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceed six. 21. 21. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table above (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years. 6. In view of the above, in the present case, the multiplier of 15 instead of 14 ought to have been applied, as the deceased was 38 years of age at the time of death and the dependency of 3/4th ought to have been taken, as there are five dependents. Ordered accordingly. 7. From the perusal of the award, it emerges that no amount has been awarded towards loss of consortium and funeral expenses. In view of Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others, [2013(4) Law Herald (SC) 3006 : 2013(3) Law Herald (P&H) 2274 (SC)] : 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 170, (Supreme Court), in the present case, this Court awards a sum of Rs.1 lac as loss of consortium and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses etc. 8. Accordingly, the total compensation comes to Rs.8,27,000/- ( 5200 (monthly income) x 3/4th (dependency) x 12 x 15 (multiplier) + 1,00,000/- (consortium) + 25,000/- (funeral expenses etc.). The balance enhanced amount i.e. Rs.2,55,800/- (8,27,000 -5,71,200 already awarded by the Tribunal) shall be paid to the claimant-appellants, in the manner indicated in the impugned Award, within 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment, failing which, the appellants shall be entitled to get interest @ 8% per annum from the date of the filing of the appeal till its realisation. 9. The Tribunal has not awarded any interest on the awarded compensation, however, it was directed that if the amount is not deposited within three months, the appellants shall be held entitled to get 9% interest from the date of passing the award till its realisation. 9. The Tribunal has not awarded any interest on the awarded compensation, however, it was directed that if the amount is not deposited within three months, the appellants shall be held entitled to get 9% interest from the date of passing the award till its realisation. Therefore, the appellants are also entitled to get interest @ 6.5% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of the filing of the claim petition, till its deposit before the learned Tribunal. 10. In view of the above, the present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award is modified to the above extent.