Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rekha Rani Wife Of Kishore Kumar vs Ranjit Singh Son Of Darbara Singh on 24 July, 2012
Author: K.Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.72 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision: 24.07.2012
Rekha Rani wife of Kishore Kumar, and another
....Appellants
versus
Ranjit Singh son of Darbara Singh, resident of Malkana Patti, Wadi
Majri, Samana, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, and another.
....Respondents
II. FAO No.126 of 2012 (O&M)
Lalita Walia wife of Sunil Kumar Walia, and another
....Appellants
versus
Ranjit Singh son of Darbara Singh, resident of Malkana Patti, Wadi
Majri, Samana, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, and another.
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
----
Present: Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate, for the appellants.
Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
----
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.
----
K.Kannan, J.
I. FAO No.72 of 2012
1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for death of a male, aged 19 years, who was studying mechanical FAO No.72 of 2012 (O&M) -2- engineering at Shahid Udham Singh College, Tangori. The claimants are his parents. The Tribunal assessed his income notionally at ` 15,000/- per year, made a 50% deduction for his personal expenses and took the contribution to the family at ` 7,500/-, adopting a multiplier of 14, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of ` 2,15,000/-. The amount is said to be very low.
2. In case of death of a bachelor with prospects of his own marriage and the likely reduction of contribution to the family, the extent of dependency is always calculated differently than how it is done for a spouse or children. Again, where the claimants are aged parents, the choice of multiplier would be appropriately dealt with by providing for a multiplier that would have a bearing to the age of the younger of the parents in preference to the age of the deceased. To the extent to which the trial Court provided for a 50% deduction for personal expenses and providing of a choice of multiplier at 14, I shall not find fault with the award of the Tribunal. However, the notional income projected by the Tribunal, in my view, is wrong, particularly in view of the fact that the deceased was an engineering student and was in the 6th semester. The likely income of such a person during the time when he died ought to be assumed to be relatively at a higher scale on the assumption that in another two years, he would have completed his studies and would have joined the job market. In Arvind Kumar Mishra Versus New India FAO No.72 of 2012 (O&M) -3- Assurance Company (2010) 10 SCC 254, for a 70% disability suffered by an engineering college student for accident that took place in 1993, the Supreme Court projected a salary as ` 5000 per month and determined the compensation. In this case, the accident has taken place in 2010, the likely income could be easily assumed to be at least ` 10,000/- per month, adopt a 50% discount and take the contribution to the family at ` 5,000/- per month. I will adopt the multiplier of 14 as taken by the Tribunal and take the loss of dependency at ` 8,40,000/-. The Court below has already provided for ` 1 lakh as special damages, which I retain and also retain ` 5,000/- provided for funeral expenses and another ` 5,000/- towards loss to estate. In all, the total amount of compensation would come to ` 9,50,000/-. The amount in excess of what has been awarded by the Tribunal already shall bear interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment.
II. FAO No.126 of 2012
3. This case is in relation to the death of yet another Engineering College student travelling with the deceased in respect of which the connected FAO No.72 of 2012 has been dealt with. The only difference that has to be applied to this case is that the age of the first claimant was relatively higher than the age in FAO No.72 of 2012 and instead of a multiplier of 14, I would adopt a multiplier of 13 and in all other aspects, the same method of calculation is FAO No.72 of 2012 (O&M) -4- adopted. The amount of compensation would come to ` 7,80,000/-. The Court below has already provided for ` 1 lakh as special damages, which I retain and also retain ` 5,000/- provided for funeral expenses and another ` 5,000/- towards loss to estate. In all, the total amount of compensation would come to ` 8,90,000/-. The amount in excess of what has been awarded by the Tribunal already shall bear interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment.
4. Both the appeals are allowed on the above terms.
(K.KANNAN) JUDGE 24.07.2012 sanjeev