Single judgment disposed of appeals by claimants and insurance company arising from a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award. Court enhanced compensation due to death from Rs. 8,98,200 to Rs. 11,43,200.
Compensation enhanced to Rs. 11,43,200/- to be paid by Respondent No.3 within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO 7265 of 2011 Date of Decision : November 20, 2012
Smt. Sunita and others
....Appellants
Versus
Ajaib Singh and others
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. Sanjeev Patiyal, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
T.P.S. MANN, J.
By one single judgment, the Court intends to dispose of the present appeal filed by the claimants and FAO 465 of 2012 filed by the Insurance Company as both the appeals have arisen out of award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh on 12.10.2011 whereby the claimants were awarded an amount of Rs. 8,98,200/- as compensation for the death of Jai Singh in a motor vehicular accident. They were also awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the said amount from the date of filing of the claim-petition till its realization. All the respondents
FAO 7265 of 2011 -2-
were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount.
In their appeal, the claimants have sought enhancement of the compensation amount whereas in the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company, prayer has been made for reduction of the same.
The Tribunal had framed three issues. Issue No. 3 as regards the entitlement of the claimants to compensation on account of death of Jai Singh and, if so, to what extent and from whom, requires reconsideration by this Court in both the appeals.
In support of their plea that deceased Jai Singh was employed with Sh. Devinder Jain, who was running a furniture factory at Panchkula, and used to drive his vehicle and earning Rs.4,500/- per month, the claimants had examined Sunitaclaimant as PW1, who stated that her husband was getting monthly salary of Rs. 4,500/- out of which he was paying Rs.3,500/- to her for household expenses. Similarly, PW4 Devinder Jain deposed that the deceased used to work with him as his driver and was being paid Rs. 3,900/- per month. In addition to the same, he was giving Rs. 100/- everyday to the deceased for his meals. However, he stated that he did not maintain any record showing the payment of Rs.100/- per day to the deceased for his meals. For that reason alone, it cannot be
-3-
FAO 7265 of 2011
said that the deceased was not being paid anything by his employer for his meals. Such like expenses are borne by the employer out of his own pocket so as to ensure that his driver is available to him as and when needed. On an average, the deceased must have been working for his employer for twenty days every month and, therefore, receiving Rs. 2,000/- every month for the meals. In addition to the same, he was getting monthly salary of Rs. 3,900/-. Both the amounts when taken together are sufficient to hold that the deceased was getting Rs.5,900/- per month and when rounded of, Rs. 6,000/- per month. Keeping in view the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Santosh Devi Vs . National Insurance Co. Ltd. and others , 2012 ACJ 1428 , it would be reasonable to conclude that the deceased would have got 30% increase in his total income over a period of time and, therefore, the monthly income stands determined as Rs. 7,800/-. Keeping in view the size of the family left behind by the deceased, 1/4th has to be deducted out of the aforementioned amount which the deceased might be spending upon himself so as to calculate the dependency as Rs. 5,850/- per month or Rs. 70,200/- per annum. The deceased was 32 years of age as was recorded in the post mortem report Ex. P1. Therefore, multiplier of 16 has to be applied so as to calculate the total dependency as Rs.11,23,200/-.
FAO 7265 of 2011 -4-
The Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs. 5,000/- to Sunita-claimant for loss of consortium, Rs. 5,000/- as funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- as loss of estate. The aforementioned amount of Rs. 15,000/- under the conventional heads is also on the lower side and requires enhancement to Rs. 20,000/-. The said amount of Rs. 20,000/- when added to the total dependency, makes the claimants entitled to obtain a sum of Rs. 11,43,200/as compensation.
Resultantly, the compensation amount is enhanced from Rs. 8,98,200/- as awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.11,43,200/-. The entire enhanced amount of compensation shall be paid by respondent No.3-Insurance Company within a period of three months from the date of preparation of certified copy of the order failing which the same shall fetch interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim-petition till its realization.
The appeal, i.e. FAO 7265 of 2011 filed by the claimants is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above, while the other appeal, i.e. FAO 465 of 2012 filed by the Insurance Company, is dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
( T.P.S. MANN ) JUDGE
November 20, 2012 ajay-1
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal needs to be enhanced.
Whether the quarterly deduction for self-dependency and multiplier for age calculation are correctly applied.
Whether the conventional heads of loss (consortium, funeral, estate) require enhancement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Santosh Devi Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and othersApplied¶17
Santosh Devi Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. and others, 2012 ACJ 1428
Sunita and others
Ajaib Singh and others
Insurance Company
T.P.S. MANN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
