Himachal Pradesh High Court
Veena Devi And Others vs State Of H.P. And Others on 1 July, 2016
Author: Mansoor Ahmad Mir
Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
FAO No.: 202 of 2011.
Decided on : 01.07.2016
Veena Devi and others .....Appellants
Versus
.
State of H.P. and others ... Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
of
For the appellants: Mr.G.R. Palsara, Advocate.
For the respondents:
rt Mr.Kush Sharma, Deputy Advocate
General, for respondents No.1 and
2.
Mr.Surender Verma, Advocate, for
respondent No.3.
___________________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)
Subject matter of this appeal is the award, dated 15th February, 2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (for short, "the Tribunal") in Claim Petition No.79 of 2003, titled Veena Devi and others vs. State of H.P. and others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/-, alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the amount is deposited, came to be awarded in favour of the claimants and respondents ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:44:34 :::HCHP 2 No.1 and 2 were saddled with the liability, (for short the "impugned award").
2. Respondents have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, thus, the same has attained finality so far .
as it relates to them.
3. Feeling aggrieved, the claimants have challenged the impugned award by the medium of instant appeal on the ground of adequacy of compensation. Thus, the only question of needs to be determined is - Whether the amount awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate? The answer is in the affirmative for rt the following reasons.
4. Admittedly, the deceased was a government servant, was serving with respondents No.1 and 2, and, as per the salary certificate proved on record as Ext.PW-5/A, was earning Rs.9,921/- per month, or say Rs.10,000/- per month.
5. The claimants, in the instant case, are four in number. Therefore, in view of the law laid by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, which decision was also upheld by the larger Bench of the Apex Court in Reshma Kumari and others vs. Madan Mohan and ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:44:34 :::HCHP 3 another, 2013 AIR (SCW) 3120, 1/4th was to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. Thus, the monthly loss of source of dependency to the claimants, after .
deducting 1/4th, can be said to be Rs.7,500/-.
6. The deceased was 40 years of age at the time of accident. Therefore, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) and 2nd Schedule of attached to the Act, multiplier of 14 is just and appropriate and is applied accordingly.
7. rt In view of the above, the claimants are held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.7,500x12x14=Rs.12,60,000/- under the head 'loss of source of dependency'. In addition, the claimants are also held entitled for Rs.10,000/- each (total Rs.40,000/-) under the heads 'loss of love and affection', 'loss of estate', 'loss of consortium' and ' funeral expenses'.
8. Accordingly, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.12,60,000/- + Rs.40,000/- = Rs.13,00,000/-.
9. Learned counsel for the appellants also submitted that the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 6% per ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:44:34 :::HCHP 4 annum, which is on the lower side and prayed for enhancing the same.
10. It is beaten law of land that the rate of interest .
should be awarded as per the prevailing rates, in view of the judgments rendered by the Apex Court in cases titled as United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and others versus Patricia Jean Mahajan and others, reported in (2002) 6 Supreme of Court Cases 281; Santosh Devi versus National Insurance Company Ltd. and others, reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2892;
Amrit Bhanu Shali and others versus National Insurance rt Company Limited and others, reported in (2012) 11 Supreme Court Cases 738; Smt. Savita versus Binder Singh & others, reported in 2014 AIR SCW 2053; Kalpanaraj & Ors. versus Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpn., reported in 2014 AIR SCW 2982; Amresh Kumari versus Niranjan Lal Jagdish Pd. Jain and others, reported in (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 433, and Mohinder Kaur and others versus Hira Nand Sindhi (Ghoriwala) and another, reported in (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 434, and discussed by this Court in a batch of FAOs, FAO No. 256 of 2010, titled as Oriental Insurance ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:44:34 :::HCHP 5 Company versus Smt. Indiro and others, being the lead case, decided on 19.06.2015.
11. Having said so, it is held that the amount of .
compensation awarded by the Tribunal shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the same is deposited and the enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum of from the date of passing of the impugned award till the final payment is made. Respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to rt deposit the amount of compensation, alongwith up-to-date interest, within a period of eight weeks from today and on deposit, the Registry is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the impugned award.
12. Viewed thus, the impugned award is modified and the appeal is allowed, as indicated hereinabove.
13. Send down the record forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.
July 01, 2016. ( Mansoor Ahmad Mir )
(Tilak) Chief Justice
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:44:34 :::HCHP