Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kartar Kaur And Another vs Manoj Kumar And Others on 26 February, 2014
Author: Jitendra Chauhan
Bench: Jitendra Chauhan
FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-5673-2011 (O&M)
(MACT case No.84 /2008)
Date of decision: 26.2.2014
Kartar Kaur and another
...Appellants
Versus
Manoj Kumar and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr.Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the appellants
Mr.Prateek Pandit, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr.RK Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2
Mr.Arun Sharma, Advocate for
Mr.TK Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Mr.BD Sharma, Advocate
for respondent No.4- cross-objector
****
Jitendra Chauhan, J.
Application for condonation of delay Despite sufficient opportunity, no reply has been filed by the respondents.
Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 89 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned.
Main appeal Shanker Gauri 2014.03.10 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 2
1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimants, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar (for short 'the Tribunal'), vide award dated 21.12.2010, on account of the death of Sukhdev Singh, in a motor vehicular accident. Respondent No.4 has also filed cross- objection.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the deceased was a carpenter and he was employed in Dubai. However, the learned Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.3000/- per month, which is on the lower side, whereas, no amount has been awarded towards future prospects. The deceased was the sole bread earner of the family. He left behind old parents and widow. The deceased was 34 years of age at the time of his death and therefore in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others vs. DTC and another 2009(3) RCR (Civil), 77 the multiplier of 16 should have been applied. The amount awarded towards loss of consortium and funeral expenses is on the lower side.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4- cross- objector submits that the learned Tribunal has wrongly apportioned the award. The said respondent was the wife of the deceased. He cites Sunita vs. Ram Kumar 2012(4) Law Herald 3325 and states that the wife after her remarriage is entitled to full compensation.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- Shanker Gauri 2014.03.10 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 3 Insurance Company submits that just and appropriate compensation has been awarded. He prays for the dismissal of the appeal.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
6. The factum of death of Sukhdev Singh on account of the injuries suffered by him in a road accident is not disputed. He left behind his widow, and old parents aged about 72 years of mother and 77 years of father. He was the sole bread earner of the family. In Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others 2013 (9) SCC 54, in para 11, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:
"11. Since, the Court in Santosh Devi's case (supra) actually intended to follow the principle in the case of salaried persons as laid in Sarla Verma's case (supra) and to make it applicable also to the self employed and person on fixed wages, it is clarified that the increase in the case of those groups is not 30% always; it will also have a reference to the age. In other words, in the case of self employed or persons of fixed wages, in case, the deceased victim was below 40 years, there must be an addition of 50% to the actual income of the deceased while computing future prospects.
Needless to say that the actual income should be income after paying the tax, if any. Addition should be 30% in case the deceased was in the age group of 40 to 50 years."
7. In the present case, the deceased was 34 years of age at Shanker Gauri 2014.03.10 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 4 the time of occurrence. Thus, taking in to consideration the age of the deceased, 50% increase in the income of the deceased with regard to the future prospects and multiplier of 16 deserve to be allowed. Ordered accordingly.
8. The untimely death of Sukhdev was a great shock to his family. He was the sole bread earner of the family. As is evident from the record, no amount has been awarded towards loss of love and affection to the mother. This Court feels that the amount awarded towards loss of consortium and funeral and last rites expenses is also inadequate. Keeping in view the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vimal Kanwar and others vs. Kishore Dan and others (2013-3) PLR 776, the compensation under the following heads is enhanced/ allowed, which would meet the ends of justice:-
S.No. Heads From To
1. Loss of consortium payable to Rs.5,000/- Rs.1,00,000/-
the wife
2. Funeral and last rites expenses Rs.2,000/- Rs.15,000/-
enhanced
3. Loss of love and affection to the Rs.1,00,000/-
mother, if alive.
9. The widow has remarried and therefore, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.31,000/- to her.
10. In Sunita' vs. Ram Kumar 2012 (4) Law Herald 3325 (P &H), this Court has observed as under:-
"6. I am not in agreement with the view that a Shanker Gauri 2014.03.10 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 5 woman who chooses to remarry after the death of his husband is disentitled to receive compensation beyond the period she remained as a widow. Such a view would go against the proposal of remarriage of the widow after the death of her husband. In other words, taking such a drastic view would discourage the remarriage after the death of the husband. The widow who has been left behind by the husband is entitled to full compensation even after her remarriage."
11. The argument that the widow, after remarriage, is not entitled to any compensation, is repelled.
12. In view of the above, the compensation be apportioned in the ratio of 70:30 to the widow and parents respectively.
13. Accordingly, the total compensation under loss of dependency comes to Rs.5,76,000/-( 3000 (monthly income) + 50% (future prospects)- 1/3rd (deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased) x 12 x 16 (multiplier). The amount awarded towards medical expenses will remain the same. The enhanced amount under the loss of dependency i.e.Rs.4,32,000 (5,76,000-(1,20,000+24,000) plus Rs.2,44,000/- (medical expenses) shall be paid to the claimants in the ration 70:30 to the wife and parents of the deceased respectively. The amount under conventional heads shall also be paid to the claimants in the manner as noticed above. The amount shall be paid within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the Shanker Gauri 2014.03.10 15:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-5673-2011 (O&M) 6 certified copy of the judgment, failing which, the appellants shall be entitled to get interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the filing of the appeal till its realisation.
14. In view of the above, the present appeal as well as the cross-objections is partly allowed and the impugned Award is modified to the above extent.
26.2.2014 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
gsv JUDGE
Shanker Gauri
2014.03.10 15:09
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh