Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhago vs Gurlal Singh Etc on 26 February, 2015

Author: Jaspal Singh

Bench: Jaspal Singh

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH


                                                                 FAO No.139 of 2003 (O & M)
                                                             Date of Decision: February 26, 2015


                    Bhago
                                                                                   ..... APPELLANT

                                                              VERSUS

                    Gurlal Singh @ Lal Singh & others
                                                                               ..... RESPONDENTS

                                                                 ...

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH ...

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

...

PRESENT: - Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. T.S. Rai, Advocate, for Mr. S.S. Swaich, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate, for respondent No.3 - Insurance Company.

. . .

Jaspal Singh, J

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation on account of death of her son Kuldip Singh who succumbed to injuries AVIN KUMAR 2015.03.20 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No.139 of 2003 [2] received in a motor vehicle accident on November 06, 2000 involving Truck No.PB-11-L-1422.

2. While assailing impugned award dated June 11, 2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar (for short, 'Tribunal'), learned counsel for the appellant has contended that compensation awarded on account of death of Kuldip Singh is insufficient and inadequate, thus, liable to be enhanced. Income of deceased has been assessed to the tune of ` 3,000/- per month only. Kuldip Singh was a skilled driver, earning ` 5,000/- per month and was 23 years of age at the time of his death in the accident. Multiplier of 10 applied by the Tribunal is also contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009(2) RCR (Civil) 77. Kuldip Singh was the only bread winner of his family consisting of his parents, one brother and two sisters.

3. It has further been contended by learned counsel that learned Tribunal has also failed to award any sort of compensation on account of loss of future prospects and loss of love & affection to the claimant whereas meagre amount of ` 20,000/- has been awarded on account of funeral expenses. AVIN KUMAR 2015.03.20 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No.139 of 2003 [3]

4. Learned counsel for the respondents have supported the award passed by the Tribunal by submitting that since just and adequate compensation has already been awarded by the Tribunal while keeping in view the facts & circumstances of the case, evidence available on file and the latest proposition of law, no interference of this Court is justified. Appeal deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs.

5. This Court has given an anxious thought to the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record available.

6. The Tribunal has assessed the income of Kuldip Singh, deceased, as ` 3,000/- per month and dependency of mother has been worked out to ` 800/- per month as the claimant has not impleaded father, brother and sisters who were also dependent upon the deceased to some extent. The Tribunal, by applying multiplier of 10, awarded compensation to the claimant of ` 1,16,000/- including ` 20,000/- on account of loss of love & affection and funeral expenses.

7. As far as income of Kuldip Singh is concerned, claimant - appellant has stepped into witness box as AW-2 and deposed that her son Kuldip Singh was a driver by profession and earning ` 5,000/- per month. However, no documentary AVIN KUMAR 2015.03.20 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No.139 of 2003 [4] evidence was brought on record to prove this fact. Learned Tribunal has assessed monthly income of deceased to the tune of ` 3,000/- per month as per Minimum Wages Act. But while awarding compensation, learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that claimant was also entitled to some amount on account of loss of future prospects.

8. In view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajesh & others vs. Rajbir Singh & others, 2013(3) RCR (Civil) 170, claimant - appellant is entitled to future prospects to the extent of 50%, hence the monthly income of deceased including future prospects is assessed as ` 4,500/- per month. After having deducted 50% of his income in consideration of expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining himself had he been alive, dependency works out to ` 2,250/- per month.

9. As per the guidelines highlighted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case (supra), since the deceased was 23 years of age i.e. in the age group of 15-25 years, multiplier of 18 deserves to be applied. Therefore, claimant is entitled to compensation to the tune of ` 4,86,000/- i.e. 2250 X 12 X 18.

AVIN KUMAR 2015.03.20 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No.139 of 2003 [5]

10. In view of the law laid down in Darshan Lal Oberoi & others vs. Babu Lal & others, 2014(2) RCR (Civil) 457, since Kuldip Singh was unmarried, claimant being mother is also entitled to compensation on account of loss of love & affection which is assessed to the tune of ` 1,00,000/-. Besides, claimant - appellant is also entitled to ` 25,000/- on account of funeral expenses.

11. In the light of what has been discussed above, appeal is partly allowed and appellant - claimant is, thus, entitled to enhanced compensation to the tune of ` 6,11,000/- instead of ` 1,16,000/- which shall be payable by Insurance Company - respondent No.3. Enhanced amount shall be payable within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment, otherwise, it shall entail interest @ 9% per annum from the date of original claim petition.

12. No order as to costs.


                                                                      (Jaspal Singh)
                    February 26, 2015                                    Judge
                    avin




AVIN KUMAR
2015.03.20 10:13
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court of Punjab & Haryana at
Chandigarh