Partly allowed

Karamjit Kaur etc. v. Siri Ram Et.C

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Aug 2014FAO/1761/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court appellate judgment modified the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award for a deceased claimant's dependents. The court directed adding 50% income for future prospects, applying a multiplier of 17, and awarding consortium and funeral expenses, increasing the total compensation.

What did the court decide?

Compensation increased to Rs. 5,03,420/- with 7.5% per annum interest; 60% to the widow, remainder shared equally.

Karamjit Kaur etc. Vs Siri Ram Et.C — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

FAO-1761-2001 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

FAO-1761-2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 12, 2014

¶5

Karamjit Kaur and others

¶6

.....Appellants

¶7

¶8

Siri Ram Bus Service Sangria Mandi and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr.Vinod Kumar Kataria, Advocate for the appellants.

¶12

Ms.Vandana Malhotra, and Ms.Monika Jangra, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶13

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.

¶14

The present appeal has been filed by claimants Karamjit Kaur (widow), Kulwinder Kaur @ Sonu (minor daughter), Varinder Singh (minor son), Darshan Singh (father) and Parkash Kaur (mother) of Balwant Singh (since deceased), who died in a motor vehicular accident.

¶15

The learned counsel contends that the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridkot, (for brevity the 'Tribunal') has awarded a meagre sum of 2,37,600/- only, without adding 50% income as future prospects, consortium to the extent of 1,00,000/-, and `25,000/- as funeral expenses. He submits that

¶16

MEENU 2014.08.27 11:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶17

FAO-1761-2001 (O&M) - 2 -

¶18

on the basis of latest judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others, 2013(3) RCR (Civil) 170, the award passed by learned Tribunal be modified.

¶19

On the other hand, Ms. Vandana Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company submitted that the multiplier of 18 was wrongly applied by the learned Tribunal. To elaborate her arguments, she submitted that at the age of 26 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 17 and not of 18.

¶20

The learned counsel for the claimants has fairly conceded that in the present case multiplier of 17 would be applicable in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma and another vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others, 2009(2) SCC (Criminal) 1002.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

¶22

Learned counsel for appellants contends that Balwant Singh, since deceased, was working as an ancillary worker besides working as Conductor on a truck. The learned Tribunal has worked out his monthly income at 1650/- per month. He submits that the said income be presumed to be correct and 50% income be added for future prospects and thereafter, the multiplier of 17 be applied. He also contends that 1,00,000/- be awarded as

¶23

MEENU 2014.08.27 11:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶24

FAO-1761-2001 (O&M)

¶25

¶26

consortium and `25,000/- as funeral expenses.

¶27

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants (claimants) are based upon the judgments rendered in the cases of Sarla Verma and Rajesh (supra).

¶28

The learned Tribunal assessed 1650/- as the monthly income of the deceased. If 825/-, i.e. 50% of 1650/-, is added to his income as future prospects, then it would come to 2475/-. 1/4^th of the total income, i.e.620/-, if deducted as personal expenses of the deceased then the monthly income would come to 1855/- p.m. The same is multiplied by 12 and further multiplied by 17, then it would come to 3,78,420/-(1855 x 12 x 17). An amount of 1,00,000/- is added as consortium and 25,000/- as funeral expenses. In this way, the total amount of compensation comes to `5,03,420/-.

¶29

Therefore, the claimants are held entitled to a total amount of `5,03,420/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the full and final payment is made. Since the respondent-Insurance Company has not denied its responsibility, therefore, the awarded amount will be paid by the respondent-Insurance Company.

¶30

However, it is made clear that 60% of the total amount shall be paid to the widow while remaining amount shall be equally shared by the remaining claimants. If any one of the appellant-claimants is no more, then, his/her share would be

¶31

MEENU 2014.08.27 11:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶32

FAO-1761-2001 (O&M)

¶33

¶34

distributed in equal shares amongst the surviving claimants.

¶35

With the above modifications in the award, the appeal

¶36

is partly allowed.

¶37