Allowed

Roopa Devi and Another v. Ajmer Singh and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Sept 2015FAO/1007/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced the compensation awarded to motor accident claimants from Rs. 1,35,000 to Rs. 5,12,400 by recalculating future prospects and applying statutory deductions, with the excess payable with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 5,12,400/- with the excess amount of Rs. 3,77,400/- payable within 45 days carrying interest at 9% p.a.

Roopa Devi and Another Vs Ajmer Singh and… — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

FAO No. 1007 of 1998

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

FAO No. 1007 of 1998 Date of decision:- 08.09.2015

¶5

Roopa Devi and another

¶6

...Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ajmer Singh and others

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶11

Present:Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate for the appellants

¶12

Mr. Rohit Goswami, Advocate for Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for respondent-Insurance Company

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

RITU BAHRI J. (Oral)

¶16

The present appeal has been preferred by the claimantsappellants (for short 'the appellants'), against award dated 11.11.1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (for short, 'the Tribunal') to the tune of Rs.1,35,000/-.

¶17

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

¶18

On 21.01.1994, Ramesh (since deceased) was returning from

¶19

Hansi to village Barasi on his cycle. In the meantime, a matador No. DL-2CE5278 came from Hansi side at a very fast speed, being driven by respondent

¶20

No. 1 and struck with the cycle of the deceased, who died at the spot. F.I.R

¶21

(Ex P1) was registered in this regard by P.W.2 Om Parkash. The deceased

¶22

GAURAV ARORA 2015.09.30 12:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

FAO No. 1007 of 1998

¶24

-2-

¶25

was only 20 years old at the time of the alleged accident.

¶26

The learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contends that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side, as future prospect has not been given and further the compensation has been given as lump sum, thus the compensation deserves to the enhanced, in view

¶27

of the judgment '' Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) Page 77', 'Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others, 2013 (9) SCC 54' and 'Munna Lal Jain and another vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and others, 2015(3) Recent Apex Judgments 459', Asha Verman and others vs. Maharaj Singh and others, 2015(2) RCR (Civil) 520 and Kalpanaraj and others v. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, 2015(2) SCC (Civil) 193 .

¶28

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondentInsurance Company have vehemently opposed the present appeal.

¶29

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶30

COMPENSATION ASSESSED BY MACT

¶31

6. The learned Tribunal assessed the salary of the deceased at Rs.1500/- per month presuming him to be a labourer as there was no proof of the income of the deceased. The learned Tribunal has only awarded Rs.1,35,000/- towards compensation

¶32

RE-ASSESSED COMPENSATION

¶33

It is not in dispute that the accident had taken place and the

¶34

GAURAV ARORA 2015.09.30 12:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶35

FAO No. 1007 of 1998

¶36

-3-

¶37

offending vehicle was fully insured with the Insurance company.

¶38

Reference at this stage can be made to a judgment passed by

¶39

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd v.

¶40

Gopali and others, 2012 (12) SCC 198 whereby Hon'ble the Supreme Court in an old case of 1992 had taken the monthly income of deceased at Rs.3000/- and cut of 1/10^th was imposed, keeping in view the fact that a person having a minimum income of Rs.3000/- could not think of spending 1/3^rd of his income on himself.

¶41

9. Keeping in view the above mentioned judgments, the

¶42

compensation has to be re-assessed as follows :-

¶43

*Sr.* *No.*	*Heads*	*Calculations*
(i)	Salary	Rs.1500/- per month
(ii)	50% of (i) above to be added as future prospects=	Rs.1500+Rs.750=Rs.2250/- per month
(iii)	1/10^th deducted as personal expenses of the deceased=	Rs.2250-225=Rs.2025/-
(iv)	Compensation after multiplier of 18 is applied	Rs.2025X12X18= Rs.4,37,400/-
(v)	Funeral charges, loss of love and affection, loss of estate	Rs.75,000/-
(xii)	Total Compensation awarded	Rs.5,12,400/-
	Enhanced amount of compensation	5,12,400-1,35,000=Rs.3,77,400/-