Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kailash Chaudhary And Others vs Jaswant Singh & Others on 18 May, 2012
Author: Jitendra Chauhan
Bench: Jitendra Chauhan
FAO No.4189 of 2011 -1-
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No.4189 of 2011
In MACT Case No. 219 of 2008
Date of decision: 18.5.2012
Kailash Chaudhary and others ...Appellant
Versus
Jaswant Singh & others ...Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr. Abhisehk Yadav, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate
for the respondent.
JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL)
The appellants have preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation amount awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari on account of death of Danesh Kumar Chaudhary in a vehicular accident that took place on 17.8.2008.
Brief facts of the case are that on 17.8.2008, the appellants Gayan Singh Baliyan, Desh Kumar, Naveen Kumar, Mukesh Kumar, Dhanesh Kumar and Santosh Malik, all employees of M/s Atlas Steel Tubes Industries Ltd, Bawal after attending their duties, were coming to Rewari by Tempo bearing registration No HR-47A-6009. When they reached near FAO No.4189 of 2011 -2- Karnawas Petrol pump, a Bulero Jeep No. HR-66-2095 being driven by Jaswant Singh in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and without blowing a horn, hit the Tempo. As a result thereof, all the occupants of the Tempo received multiple injuries. Deceased Danesh Kumar succumbed to his injuries. An FIR No.260 dated 17.8.2008 under Sections 279/337 IPC was registered at Police Station, Model Town Rewari.
The claimants-appellants, widow and children of the deceased preferred claim petition bearing MACT Case No.219 of 2008, Kailash Chaudhry and others Vs. Jaswant Singh and others, before the Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari, which was decided by the learned Tribunal on 29.10.2010 awarding an amount of Rs.13,50,768/- on account of death of Danesh Kumar in a vehicular accident that took place on 17.8.2008.
Feeling dissatisfied by the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Rewari, the claimants-appellants came up in the present appeals seeking enhancement of the compensation amount.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the deceased was working as a joint Manager and had been earning Rs.23,853/- per month. He further contends that the deceased was 54 years of age at the time of the accident, therefore, the learned Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 7, which ought to have been 11. He further contends that no amount towards the heads 'love and affection', 'transportation' and furture aspect' was awarded by the learned Tribunal. FAO No.4189 of 2011 -3-
On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent states that adequate and sufficient compensation amount has already been awarded by the learned Tribunal. He further prays for dismissal of the appeal.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the reocrd.
In the instant case, the accident in question was not in dispute and the same is well established on reocord. It has been further proved from the post mortem report i.e. Ex-P-62, that the deceased was 54 years of age at the time of the accident. Therefore, this Court feels that the multiplier of 7 applied by the learned Tribunal is incorrect and the same ought to have been 11 as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77. Ordered accordingly.
The enhanced amount comes to Rs 7,63,296/-
(Rs.1,90,824 (Annual dependency) X 11 (enhanced multiplier)+ 15,000 (awarded by the Tribunal under the heads funeral expenses and loss of consortium)=Rs.21,14,064 (21,14,064
-13,50,768 (total compensation awarded by the Tribunal) =Rs.7,63,296/- which shall be payable by the respondents to the claimants-appellants within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. If the amount is not paid within stipulated period the claimant shall be entitled to interest @ 7 ½ % per annum from the date of filing the appeal till its realisation.
With the above modification in the impugned award the FAO No.4189 of 2011 -4- above mentioned appeal is partly allowed.
18.5.2012 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN) aarti JUDGE