Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 504 (JK)

Harpal Singh & Anr. v. Resham Singh & Anr.

2016-10-05

RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR

body2016
JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is of the year 2006 and the same is filed by the claimants challenging the award of Tribunal. 2. The accident in this case happened on 21.02.2004. The deceased bachelor– Deedar Singh aged 24 years, was driving his matador from Satwari to Bari Brahmna and a Bus bearing registration No. DLIPA 1663 driven by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2, who remained exparte before the Tribunal and also remained exparte before this Court, caused the death of deceased. The deceased was a driver by profession and was getting Rs. 6,000/- per month. 3. The father of the deceased aged 45 years and the mother aged 43 years are the claimants and they claim Rs. 31,72,000/-as compensation. 4. The father of the deceased was examined as witness. PW-1 Narinder Singh was also examined as eye witness. PW-2 Gian Singh was examined in relation to the occupation of the deceased to prove his income as Rs. 6,000/-. 5. There is no issue of negligence and liability on the owner of the vehicle, since the vehicle was not insured. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month and deducted 2/3rd towards personal expenses and 1/3rd was determined as loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents, i.e.Rs. 2000 x 12=Rs. 24,000/- per annum. By adopting the multiplier of ‘11’, the Tribunal granted the compensation at Rs. 2,64,000/- for loss of dependency. For funeral expenses, Rs. 3,000/- was granted by the Tribunal, totaling Rs. 2,67,000/-. 6. In appeal, it is contended that deduction of 2/3rd to the personal expenses of the deceased is erroneous in terms of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled Sarla Verma and ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr. reported as (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 7. There is also a plea for enhancement of compensation which is omitted by the Tribunal. The plea of the appellants is justified. In light of the Sarla Verma’s case (Supra), the personal expenses of the deceased cannot be more than 50%. 8. In that view of the matter, by deducting 1/half towards personal expenses of the deceased out of Rs. 6,000/-, (Rs. 6,000 divided by 2 = Rs. 3,000/-) the total loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents comes to Rs. 36,000/- (Rs. 3000 x 12 = Rs. 36,000/-) per annum. 8. In that view of the matter, by deducting 1/half towards personal expenses of the deceased out of Rs. 6,000/-, (Rs. 6,000 divided by 2 = Rs. 3,000/-) the total loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents comes to Rs. 36,000/- (Rs. 3000 x 12 = Rs. 36,000/-) per annum. The deceased in this case was of 24 years old and, therefore, the appropriate multiplier in terms of the latest judgment of the Supreme Court in case titled “Munna Lal Jain and anr. v. Vipin Kumar Sharma and ors.” decided on 15.05.2015 reported in 2015 ACJ 1985 , will be ‘18’. Therefore, the total pecuniary loss will be (Rs. 36000 x 18) =Rs. 6,48,000/-. Meager amount has been granted for funeral expenses. The claimants will be entitled to Rs. 7,500/- for funeral expenses. No amount has been granted for loss of love and affection to the parents and for loss to the estate. The claimants will be entitled to Rs. 25,000/- each for loss of love and affection and they will be entitled to Rs. 10,000/- for loss to the estate. 9. The award of the Tribunal is thus modified and the claimants are entitled to the following enhanced compensation, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition before the Tribunal-- S. No.HeadingAward of the TribunalModified Award 1.For pecuniary lossRs. 2,64,000/-Rs. 6,48,000/- 2.For funeral expensesRs. 3,000/-Rs. 7,500/- 3.For loss of love and affection to father and motherNilRs. 25,000/- each (totaling Rs. 50,000/-) 4.For loss to the estateNilRs. 10,000/- TotalRs. 2,67,000/-Rs. 7,15,500/- This appeal is allowed in the above terms enhancing the award of the Tribunal.