Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 381 (HP)

Union of India v. Radha Verma

2016-04-01

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 27.10.2009, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II Solan, H.P. in MAC Petition No. 18-S of 2008, titled Smt. Radha Verma and others versus Directorate of Field Publicity Office and another, for short “the Tribunal”, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.20,28,800/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum was awarded in favour of the claimants, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short. 2. The claimants, driver and owner have not questioned the impugned award on any ground. Thus, it has attained finality so far as it relates to them. 3. The appellant has questioned the impugned award on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 4. Claimants had sought compensation by filing claim petition before the Tribunal, as per the breaks-ups given in the claim petition, which was resisted and contested by the respondents and following issues came to be framed. (i) Whether the death of Nirmal Singh was caused on account t of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the respondent No.1 and 2 as alleged? OPP. (ii) If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so the amount thereof and by whom to be paid? OPP (iii) Whether the petition is not maintainable since exgratia payment has already been made by the respondents as alleged? OPR (iv) Relief. 5. Parties have led the evidence. 6. Claimant No. 1 Radha Verma stepped into witness-box as PW1 and respondent appellant herein examined G.D. Pandey as RW1. 7. The claimants have also placed on record documents, i.e., copy of FIR, post-mortem certificate, death certificate, copy of legal heirs certificate and affidavit of Radha Verma. 8. I have examined the pleadings and the evidence on record. I am of the considered view that Nirmal Singh, husband of the claimant Radha Verma lost his life in a vehicular accident. The said findings, virtually are not in dispute. The dispute projected in the memo of appeal and in the argument is that the amount awarded is excessive, which relates to issues No. 2 and 5. 9. The Tribunal has assessed the age of the deceased as 37 years which is correct as per the averments and documents on the file. The said findings, virtually are not in dispute. The dispute projected in the memo of appeal and in the argument is that the amount awarded is excessive, which relates to issues No. 2 and 5. 9. The Tribunal has assessed the age of the deceased as 37 years which is correct as per the averments and documents on the file. Keeping in view the 2nd Schedule of Motor Vehicles Act, for short the Act, read with 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, multiplier of “15” is applicable and is accordingly applied in this case and not “16” as applied by the Tribunal. 10. Mr. G.D. Pandey RW 1 stated that the deceased was earning Rs.14,600/- per month as salary, and after making deductions of 1/3rd held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.9733/- per month which is correct findings. Accordingly, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.9733x12x15. Total Rs.17,51,940/-.The Tribunal has however, fallen in an error in awarding Rs.1,00,000/- under the head “love and affection” and Rs.50,000/- under the head “loss of consortium”. 11. I hold that the claimants are also entitled to compensation under the following heads as under: (i) Loss of love and affection Rs.10,000/- (ii) Loss of estate Rs.10,000/- (iii) Funeral expenses Rs.10,000/- (iv) Loss of consortium Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.40,000/- 12. Accordingly, the total amount of compensation is awarded in favour of the claimants to the tune of Rs.17,51,940+Rs.40,000/-=Rs.17,91,940/-. 13. Thus, the impugned award merits to be modified by providing that the claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.17,91,940/-, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realization. 14. Having said so, the impugned award is modified as indicated hereinabove. The Registry is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants through payees’ cheque account or by depositing the same in their bank accounts, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award and excess amount, if any be refunded to the appellant through payee’s cheque account. 15. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 16. Send down the record forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.