Allowed

Darshan Singh & Anr. v. Gursewak Singh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jul 2014FAO/3909/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against an inadequate compensation award for a motor vehicular accident death, the Court modified the award. Finding the Tribunal wrongly assessed the deceased's annual income at Rs. 12,000 instead of Rs. 30,000, the Court recalculated the compensation to Rs. 3,29,500, including miscellaneous expenses and directed payment with interest.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award is modified; additional compensation of Rs. 1,96,500 plus Rs. 9,500 for miscellaneous expenses awarded with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Darshan Singh & Anr. Vs Gursewak Singh & Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

FAO No.3909 of 2005 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

FAO No.3909 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision:09.07.2014

¶5

Darshan Singh and another

¶6

....Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

Gursewak Singh alias Bhana and others ....Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

¶10

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

¶11

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Present:- Mr. Ashok Jindal, Advocate

¶14

for the appellants.

¶15

Mr. Siddharth Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶16

Mr. D.R.Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶17

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL)

¶18

This is claimants' appeal challenging the impugned award on the ground that compensation granted to them is inadequate.

¶19

The instant claim application was filed under Section 163-

¶20

A of the Motor Vehicles Act by by the claimant-appellants seeking compensation on account of death of one Sukhmander Singh, who died in a motor vehicular accident on 24.04.2004, due to use of offending vehicle i.e. truck No.RJ-31-G-4232 which was duly insured with respondent No.3.

¶21

Kadian Savita 2014.07.10 10:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶22

FAO No.3909 of 2005 (O&M)

¶23

¶24

The Tribunal applying a cut of 1/3^rd toward his personal expenses and a multiplier of 16 ordered payment of total compensation of 1,33,000/- after determining annual income of the deceased at 12,000/- per annum.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶26

claimant/appellants has vehemently argued before this Court that annual income of the deceased has been wrongly determined at `12,000/- per annum as there is ample evidence on record to prove the fact that the deceased was earning about Rs.2500-3000/- per month.

¶27

Counsel for the appellants has referred to the fact that employer of the deceased, Jaspal Singh has stepped into witness box as AW2. In his cross-examination, he has stated that he used to pay a sum of 12,000-13,000/- per annum along with food to the deceased. Counsel for the appellant has pointed out that it has further come in his statement that the deceased used to earn 25003000/- per month and thus, according to the counsel for appellants, the income of the deceased should have been determined at ` 30,000/- per annum.

¶28

However, learned counsel representing the respondentInsurance Company has supported the impugned award and has submitted that there is no evidence on record to prove the assertion on behalf of the claimants as raised.

¶29

Be that as it may, the claimants have proved on record by

¶30

Kadian Savita 2014.07.10 10:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶31

FAO No.3909 of 2005 (O&M)

¶32

¶33

producing the witness that deceased was earning ` 2500-3000/- per month. There is no rebuttal evidence to controvert the aforesaid fact on record.

¶34

In view thereof, this Court is of the view that while computing compensation, income of the deceased has been wrongly assessed and the same should have been determined at 30,000/-. After taking the annual income at 30,000/- after applying a cut of 1/3^rd and taking the annual dependency at 20,000/- and applying multiplier of 16, the total compensation payable shall come to3,20,000/-. Appellants are also held entitled to ` 9,500/- as miscellaneous expenses under the structured formula.

¶35

Thus, a total sum of ` 3,29,500/- as compensation is assessed in favour of the appellants on account of death of deceased-Sukhmandher Singh.

¶36

Let the balance amount of compensation be paid to the claimants within two months along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization.

¶37

The impugned award is modified to the aforesaid extent.

¶38

Allowed.

¶39

July 09, 2014 savita

¶40

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE

¶41

Kadian Savita 2014.07.10 10:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Darshan Singh & Anr. v. Gursewak Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Singh & Anr. v. Gursewak Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sant Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kulbir Ram Vs Dharamshala Baba Deva Singh and Ors.

Jaipal Singh Dhull Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

(O&M) Smt. Pushpa Rani Vs Dilbagh Singh and Others

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kalu Ram & Ors.

Icici Lombard Gen. Insu. Co. Ltd. Vs Dhola Ram @ Dholu @ Raj Kumar & Ors.