Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sharo Devi And Others vs Bheem Singh And Others on 7 November, 2012
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.7247 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision:07.11.2012.
Sharo Devi and others ...Appellants
versus
Bheem Singh and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
----
Present: Ms. Swati Batra, Advocate, for
Mr. Gurinder Pal Singh, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate,
and Ms.Vibha, Advocate,
for respondent No.3.
----
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ? No.
2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? No.
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? No.
----
K.Kannan, J. (Oral)
1. The appeal for enhancement of compensation is sought at the instance of the claimants who are two minor children and widowed mother. Both the parents have died in the accident. The age of the deceased was 34 years and he was said to be an ITI trained skilled employee working in a private company as an Associate drawing a salary of ` 23,891/-, as proved through the salary certificate produced. The said amount included a leave travel FAO No.7247 of 2011 (O&M) -2- allowance of ` 6,600/- which amount was deducted and the Tribunal made further deduction of the income tax and the local conveyance allowance and took the income to be ` 15,095/-. The Tribunal allowed for a 15 multiplier and assessed the compensation, allowing for loss of consortium at `10,000/- and ` 5,000/- towards loss to estate. The total compensation assessed at ` 18,26,340/-.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants would state that the Tribunal could not have deducted the allowance paid to the employee and ought to have taken the entire amount as shown in the salary certificate. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, the leave travel allowance could not be a monthly payment and if ` 23,891/- included an amount of ` 6,600/-, it ought to relate to a yearly allowance and the monthly allowance would have been about ` 500 to ` 600 which must be deducted. Income tax deduction was also essential and the local conveyance allowance must have been only actual amount to be defrayed for expenses incurred. Deductions on these counts were appropriate and I would find no reason to find fault with the assessment of `15,095/- as the monthly income. Although the Supreme Court has provided for a prospect of increase in salary only while examining the case of a stable employment, the Courts are moving towards a provision for future prospect of increase in a growing economy also to private employment and self-employment, as could be seen from the FAO No.7247 of 2011 (O&M) -3- decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Santosh Devi Versus National Insurance Company Limited and others-2012(2) RCR (Civil) 882. The deceased was a skilled employee and he was said to be earning about ` 23,000/- per month. He would have surely come by an increase over a period of time and I would apply the same principle as enunciated in Sarla Verma and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another-2009 ACJ 1298 and hold the average salary would require to be increased at least 50%. The choice of multiplier ought to have been 16 instead of 15 as taken by the Tribunal. I will make a minor modification with reference to the loss to love and affection, taking note of the fact that the children have come to face a grim situation of tough living in future when both the parents having died in the accident, and increase the claim under this head at ` 20,000/- each and provide for conventional heads of claim like loss to estate and funeral expenses at ` 5,000/- each. The amount payable to the claimants would require to be re- worked and is tabulated as under:-
Sr.No. Heads of claim Tribunal High Court
Amount (Rs.) Amount (Rs.)
1. Income 23,891 15,000
2. Add,% of increase 30%/50%/nil 50%=22,500
3. Deduction 1/3
4. Multiplicand 15,095 15,000
5. Multiplier 15 16
6. Loss of dependence 28,80,000
7. Loss of love and affection 10,000 40,000
8. Loss to estate 5,000
9. Funeral expenses 5,000 5,000
Total 18,26,340 29,30,000
FAO No.7247 of 2011 (O&M) -4-
3. The increase to amount that has been brought about shall be shared amongst each of the children and the grand parents (together) in the ratio of 2:2:1. The amount that bear to the children's share shall be kept in a deposit for a period of 10 years and the interest payable shall be paid during the respective minority of the children to the guardian of the children quarterly. The amount determined as payable to the appellants shall be split into 4 equated amounts as deposits, the first moiety for respective period of minority of each of the 2 children and the remaining 3 moieties invested for a number of years counted from the date of deposit to an immediate 3 consecutive years beyond the age of minority i.e. for 19, 20 and 21 years of age. The amounts which mature in the above fashion for the rest of the years beyond the age of majority the amounts shall be released on the maturity of each deposit of the respective year. As regards the share of the parents of the deceased, the entire amount shall be paid without resorting to any form of deposit.
4. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.
(K.KANNAN) JUDGE 07.11.2012 sanjeev