Claimants appeal against an award of 4,15,018 INR by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for the death of Gurdeep Kaur, demanding enhancement. The Court found no merit as unpleaded and unsupported evidence regarding age, income, or medical costs was tendered, and the multiplier was undisputed.
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.
FAO No.1013 of 2014(O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.1013 of 2014(O&M) Date of decision: 7.7.2014
Ms. Gursharan Kaur and ors.
......Appellant(s)
Versus
Ravinder Singh and another
......Respondent(s)
CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present: Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate for the appellant(s).
Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.
This is claimants' appeal challenging the impugned award dated 2.9.2013, on the ground that amount of compensation as granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal, is inadequate.
The claimants filed the instant claim petition under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation on account of death of one Gurdeep Kaur in a motor vehicular accident on 14.11.2010 caused due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, who was owner of the offending vehicle also. The vehicle in question i.e Motor Cycle No.HR-05B5920 was duly insured with respondent No.2. The claim application was resisted by the respondents, who filed their separate written statements.
Respondent No.1 admitted the factum of accident further submitting that respondent No.2 being insurer was liable to pay the amount of compensation and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition against him.
Respondent No.2 filed its separate written statement raising various preliminary objections. It was submitted that the insurer has violated the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy and
Saini Pushpinder 2014.07.10 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
FAO No.1013 of 2014(O&M)
2
driver/respondent No.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. On merits, the factum of accident was denied. It was further stated that offending vehicle was falsely implicated in the case. All other averments of the claimants were denied and dismissal of the claim petition was sought.
From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were
framed:
“1) Whether the deceased Gurdeep Kaur wife of late Palwinder Singh died in a road side accident which took place on 14.11.2010 at about 4.00 PM on Toll Plaza, G.T. Road, Panipat because of rash and negligent driving of the respondent no.1 being driver of the offending vehicle bearing No. HR-05B-5920 ? OPP
2) If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, whether the claimants are entitled for compensation, if so to what amount and on what terms and conditions and from whom? OPP
3) Whether the respondent no.1 was not having a valid and effective driving licence at the time of this accident and the vehicle in question was being plied, if so to what effect? OPR3
4) Whether the vehicle in question was being plied without a valid policy and in
Saini Pushpinder 2014.07.10 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
FAO No.1013 of 2014(O&M)
3
contravention of the policy, if so to what effect? OPR2
5) Relief.”
After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal found that Smt. Gurdeep Kaur died in an accident arising out of the use of motor cycle driven and owned by respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2 further observing that the compensation was being claimed under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act and thus, the Tribunal was not required to go into the question of negligence in causing the accident. The Tribunal after keeping in view the age of the deceased as 55 years at the time of accident and the fact that she was earning a sum of 39,600/- per annum from tailoring business and applying a cut of 1/4<sup>th,</sup> applied a multiplier of 11 and determined the compensation amount of 3,26,700/-. Besides the aforesaid amount, the claimants were also awarded 10,000/on account of funeral expenses and love and affection. The claimants further got a sum of 78,318/- as the expenses incurred on the treatment of the deceased and thus, it was held that the claimants were entitled to sum of ` 4,15,018/- as compensation in total, further holding that both the respondents were liable to pay compensation jointly and severally as the vehicle in question was duly insured and the driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident.
Still not satisfied, the claimants have filed the instant appeal seeking further enhancement in the compensation.
However, counsel for the appellants could not refer to any evidence on record on the basis of which findings of the Tribunal with regard to age and income of the deceased and also the deduction made on account of her personal expenses, could be interfered with. Counsel for
Saini Pushpinder 2014.07.10 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
FAO No.1013 of 2014(O&M)
4
the appellants has further not disputed that multiplier of 11 was just and proper. No evidence has been referred to on the basis of which it could be said that compensation granted towards medical expenses was inadequate. In fact before this Court, it could not be argued that as to how the appellants were entitled to higher compensation.
In view thereof, this Court finds no merit in this appeal.
Dismissed.
July 07, 2014 ps
(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE
Saini Pushpinder 2014.07.10 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the findings of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal regarding the age and income of the deceased and the multiplier applied.
Whether the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal for medical expenses, funeral expenses, and love and affection was inadequate.
Whether the compensation granted towards the death of the claimant needs to be enhanced.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ms. Gursharan Kaur and ors.
Ravinder Singh and another
RAKESH KUMAR GARG
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
