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 6, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Baljinder Kaur & Ors vs Manish Kumar & Ors on 17 July, 2015

Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi

Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi

           FAO-6676-2010 (O&M)                                                                -1-

            IN         THE         HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND                           HARYANA
                                        AT CHANDIGARH


                                             FAO-6676-2010 (O&M)
                                             Date of Decision: July 17, 2015

           Smt.Baljinder Kaur and ors
                                                                              .....Appellants
                                      Versus

           Manish Kumar and ors
                                                                              ......Respondents

           CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

           Present:             Mr.Amit Shukla, Advocate
                                for the appellants.

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

           1.                   Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
                                judgment ? yes
           2.                   To be referred to the Reporters or not ? yes
           3.                   Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? yes



           Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral)

CM-28916-CII-2010 Application for exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CM-28917-CII-2010 After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant- appellants and going through the contents of the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 28 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

MEENU

2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

            FAO-6676-2010 (O&M)                                                -2-

                                CM disposed of.

           FAO-6676-2010

The present appeal has been filed by widow (Baljinder Kaur), minor daughters (Jasmine Kaur and Simran Kaur), mother (Amarjit Kaur) and father (Mahinder Singh) of Swaran Singh (since deceased) challenging the award, dated 23.04.2010 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana, (for brevity, `the Tribunal'), whereby a sum of `3,12,000/- (Rupees three lacs and twelve thousand only) along with interest @ 6% per annum was awarded in favour of the appellant- claimants.

Learned counsel contends that Swaran Singh (since deceased) was an Electrician, working with Shaheed Kartar Singh Sarabha Ayurvedic College, Ludhiana, and getting a salary of `3220/- (Rupees three thousand two hundred and twenty only) per month and, as such, the learned Tribunal should have believed the said monthly income of the deceased; 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses of Swaran Singh (since deceased) as held by learned Tribunal was also against the settled norms of 1/4th since he (deceased) left behind five dependents; the learned Tribunal has failed to add 50% of the MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -3- monthly income of the deceased as future prospects while calculating the award; multiplier of 13 applied by learned Tribunal is also against the settled norms of 16; the two minor daughters and the parents of the deceased have not been awarded the adequate amount under the head 'Love and Affection'; even the widow has not been awarded the adequate amount under the head `Consortium'; the Tribunal has also failed to award the adequate amount for transportation and funeral expenses of Swaran Singh (since deceased) and that 6% interest per annum on the awarded amount was also against the settled norms of 9% per annum.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company submits that the learned Tribunal has already awarded the adequate amount of compensation, therefore, there is no scope for further enhancement.

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

The factum of accident and the death of Swaran Singh in the motor vehicular accident are not in dispute, therefore, this Court does not deem it fit to discuss the said issues in detail. MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -4- However, to give a clear picture of the case, it is suffice to say that on the intervening night of 13/14.06.2007, Swaran Singh (since deceased) while driving Maruti Zen car, bearing registration No.PB-10-T-8583, was going from Sahnewal to Dehlon. One Harjeet Singh and Kirandeep Singh (since deceased) were also travelling in the said car with Swaran Singh(since deceased). When the said car reached near culvert of Abohar branch canal, within the jurisdiction of village Khanpur on Sahnewal to Dehlon road, a truck bearing registration No.HR- 37-A-3941 being driven rashly or negligently, at a fast speed, without observing the traffic rules, by its driver Manish Kumar emerged there from the opposite side and hit the Maruti Zen car being driven by Swaran Singh (since deceased). As a result of collision of the offending truck and the Maruti Zen car, Swaran Singh, Kirandeep Singh and Harjeet Singh received multiple injuries. The injured were carried to Satguru Partap Singh Apollo Hospital, Ludhiana, where Swaran Singh succumbed to his injuries on the intervening night of 13/14.06.2007. The matter was reported to the police, on the basis of which FIR No.110, dated 14.06.2007, for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A, 337, 338 and 427, IPC, was registered at Police Station, MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -5- Sadar, Ludhiana. The appellant-claimants filed the claim petition claiming `20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lacs only) along with interest @ 18% per annum from the owner, the driver and the Insurance Company of the offending truck.

On notice the respondents did appear before the learned Tribunal and filed their respective replies. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:-

"1. Whether the claimants are legal representatives of deceased Swaran Singh? (OPA)
2. Whether Swaran Singh died due to rash and negligent driving of truck No.HR-37-A-3941 being driven by respondent No.1? (OPP).
3. Whether the claim petition is bad for non- joinder of necessary parties ? (OPR-3)
4. Whether the respondent No.1 was not holding valid and effective driving license and valid documents of truck on the date of alleged accident? If so its effect. (PR-3)
5. If issue No.1 is proved, whether the claimants are entitled to compensation, if so to what amount and from which of the respondents? (OPP) MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -6-
6. Relief."

Appellant-claimants examined Baljinder Kaur, appellant No.1 as AW1, Jaswinder Singh as AW2, Rajiv Kumar Shukla as AW3 and closed their evidence after tendering copies of FIR Ex.P1, autopsy report Ex.P2, ration card Ex.P3, proficiency certificate Ex.P4, school certificate of claimant No.2 Ex.P5, School certificate of claimant No.3 Ex.P6, receipts of Apollo hospital Ex.P7 and Ex.P8. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 were ordered to be proceeded against ex parte. Respondent No.3 closed its evidence after tendering copies of insurance policies Ex.R1, Ex.R2, report of N.K.Tandon, Ex.R3 and report of Licensing Authority Ex.P4.

While deciding issue No.1 in favour of the appellant- claimants, it was held that the appellant-claimants were the legal representatives of Swaran Singh (since deceased).

While deciding issue Nos.2 and 3 jointly, the learned Tribunal held that the accident in question had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing registration No.HR- 37-A-3941 by respondent No.1 in which Swaran Singh (since deceased) had lost his life.

Since during arguments issue No.4 was not pressed by MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -7- respondent No.3-Insurance Company and, as such, the said issue was decided in favour of the driver and the owner of the offending truck.

While deciding issue No.5, the learned Tribunal had held that Swaran Singh (since deceased) was earning `3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) per month and, as such, his annual income was assessed as `36,000/- (Rupees thirty six thousand only). Out of `36,000/-, 1/3rd income was deducted for his personal expenses and by applying the multiplier of 13, a total sum of `3,12,000/- (Rupees three lacs and twelve thousand only) along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of passing of the award till realization of the entire amount was passed.

There appears to be substance in the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant-claimants that Swaran Singh (since deceased) was an Electrician, working with Shaheed Kartar Singh Sarabha Ayurvedic College, Ludhiana, and getting a salary of `3220/- (Rupees three thousand two hundred and twenty only) per month. The learned Tribunal has not assigned the cogent reasons to hold that the monthly income of Swaran Singh (since deceased) was `3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only). On the basis of the material available on record, this Court MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -8- holds that the monthly income of Swaran Singh was `3220/- (Rupees three thousand two hundred and twenty only). Therefore, his annual income would be `38640/- (Rupees thirty eight thousand six hundred and forty only). 50% of the annual income can be added in his income as future prospects, i.e. `19,320/- (Rupees nineteen thousand three hundred and twenty only). In this way, the annual income of Swaran Singh (since deceased) would come to `57,960/- (Rupees fifty seven thousand nine hundred and sixty only). Since there were five dependents, therefore, 1/4th amount, i.e, `14,490/- (Rupees fourteen thousand four hundred and ninety only) is deducted as personal expenses of Swaran Singh (since deceased). In this way, the total annual dependency of the appellant-claimants would come to `43,470/- (Rupees forty three thousand four hundred and seventy only).

In view of the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matters of Sarla Verma vs Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (3) R.C.R. (Civil) 77 and Rajesh and others vs Rajbir Singh and others, (2013) 9 SCC 54, the adequate multiplier in the age group of 31-35 years of the deceased would be of 16, and if the annual dependency of `43,470/- (Rupees forty three thousand four hundred and seventy only) is multiplied by 16, then the total MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -9- dependency would come to `6,95,520/- (Rupees six lacs ninety five thousand five hundred and twenty only). Since there were two minor daughters left behind by the deceased, therefore, each one of them is entitled to `1,00,000/-(Rupees one lac only) for love and affection and hence, `2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs only) is awarded to both the minor daughters under the said head. The deceased had also left behind the parents and each one of them is entitled to `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) for love and affection. Therefore, `1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) is added under the said head. The widow is also entitled to `1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) for consortium and that amount is also added while calculating the just compensation. The appellant-claimants are further entitled to `25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) for transportation and funeral expenses of Swaran Singh (since deceased) and by adding the said amount, the total figure arrives at `11,20,520/- (Rupees eleven lacs twenty thousand five hundred and twenty only). Hence, the appellant-claimants are awarded compensation of `11,20,520/-(Rupees eleven lacs twenty thousand five hundred and twenty only). The calculations made above have also been shown in the table made below:-

MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

            FAO-6676-2010 (O&M)                                              -10-

            Sr.No. Heads                    %/multiplier Details of      Amount in
                                            to be applied calculations   (`)
            1.             Income of the                  Per month      3220
                           deceased
            2.             Annual income                  3220 x 12      38640
            3.             Future           50%           38640/2        19320
                           prospects
            4.             Total annual                   38640+19320 57960
                           income
            5.             Personal         1/4th         57960/4        14490
                           expenses
            6.             Annual                         57960-14490    43470
                           dependency
            7              Multiplier       16            43470 x 16     6,95,520
            8.             Love & affection 100000 each   100000 x 2     2,00,000
                           to two minor
                           daughters
            9.             Love & affection 50000 each    50000 x 2      1,00,000
                           to parents
            10.            Consortium                                    1,00,000
            11.            Transportation                                 25,000
                           & funeral
                           expenses
            12.            Total                                         11,20,520
                           compensation


Keeping in view the judgments of Hon'ble the apex Court in the matters of Neeta and others v. Divisional Manager, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, 2015 ACJ 598, and Jitendra Khim Shankar Trivedi v. Kasam Daud Kumbhar, 2015 ACJ 708, the appellant-claimants are further entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing MEENU 2015.07.22 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh FAO-6676-2010 (O&M) -11- of the petition till realization.

Hence, the appellant-claimants are entitled to `11,20,520/- (Rupees eleven lacs twenty thousand five hundred and twenty only) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till full and final amount is paid by respondent No.3-Insurance Company.

The amount already paid by the respondent-Insurance Company shall be deducted from the modified award passed by this Court.

With the above modification, the appeal is partly allowed.

           July 17, 2015                             (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI)
           meenu                                               JUDGE




MEENU
2015.07.22 15:05
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
chandigarh