Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1147 (HP)

Kusum Lata v. Bhajan Singh

2015-08-21

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2015
Judgment Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dated 2.12.2008, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II Una, HP in MAC Petition No. 36 of 2005, titled Kusum Lata and another versus Bhajan Singh and others, for short “the Tribunal”, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.7,70,000/- with 9% interest per annum was awarded in favour of the claimants, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short. 2. Insurer, owner/insured and driver have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, thus, it has attained finality so far it relates to them. 3. The claimants have questioned the impugned award on the ground of adequacy of compensation. 4. Thus, the only question to be determined in this appeal is whether the amount awarded is adequate or otherwise? 5. Heard. 6. I have gone through the record. The Tribunal has fallen in an error while recording findings in paras 18 and 19 of the impugned award. Consequently, that error has crept-in in operative part of the impugned award, needs to be corrected, for the following reasons. 7. Admittedly, the deceased was 47 years of age at the time of accident and the multiplier of “12” came to be rightly applied by the Tribunal in view of Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and upheld in Reshma Kumari and others versus Madan Mohan and another, reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3120, read with the 2nd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, for short “the Act”. However, 1/3rd was to be deducted towards personal expenses and 2/3rd was to be held loss of dependency to the claimants. The Tribunal has fallen in an error in deducting one half towards the personal expenses, is not in accordance with the law, particularly the law laid down by the apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case supra. Accordingly, it is held that the claimants have lost 2/3rd source of dependency of the income of the deceased. 8. The Tribunal has also fallen in an error in holding that the deceased was drawing Rs.15000/- as gross salary per month. The salary slip Ext. PW3/A is on the record which do disclose that at the time of death of the deceased, he was drawing salary to the tune of Rs.16291/- per month. 8. The Tribunal has also fallen in an error in holding that the deceased was drawing Rs.15000/- as gross salary per month. The salary slip Ext. PW3/A is on the record which do disclose that at the time of death of the deceased, he was drawing salary to the tune of Rs.16291/- per month. The last pay drawn, at the best, could have been rounded off to the tune of Rs.16,500/- per month. Thus, the income of the deceased is taken as Rs.16,500/- per month. Thus, the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.11000/- Accordingly, it is held that the claimants are entitled to Rs.11000x12x12 total Rs.15,84,000/-. 9. The Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 10,000/- as funeral expenses, Rs.20,000/- for loss of grievance of married life and Rs.20,000/- for love and affection, needs no interference. 10. Having said so, the appeal is allowed, the impugned award is modified as indicated hereinabove and the amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs.15,84,000/-. The appellants are entitled to Rs.15,84,000+Rs.10,000/- as funeral expenses, Rs.20,000/- loss of grievance of married life and Rs.20,000/- for love and affection, total to the tune of Rs.16,34,000/-, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realization. The insurer is directed to deposit the amount in the Registry within six weeks from today. 11. The Registry, on deposit of the amount is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award, through payee’s cheque account. 12. Send down the record, forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.