Uttarakhand High Court
Smt Maanmti Devi And Another vs Uttarakhand Transport Corporation And ... on 10 March, 2017
Author: Servesh Kumar Gupta
Bench: Servesh Kumar Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Appeal from Order No.430 of 2014
Smt. Maanmti Devi & Another .... Appellants
Versus
Uttarakhand Transport Corporation & Another.. Respondents
Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate for the appellants.
Respondents have been served sufficiently but none turned up on their behalf.
10th March, 2017
Hon'ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.
This appeal has been preferred by the claimant/mother of the deceased for enhancement of the award.
The accident occurred on 12.12.2013 at around 4:30 P.M. on Pithoragarh-Dharchula, motor road way. A roadways bus no. UK 07-P.A./1242 dashed a motor cycle, borne a youth Shri Surendra Singh Gwal, aged about 24 years, who was bachelor. So, his mother instituted the claim petition no.3/2014 claiming the compensation of Rs.13,05,000/- where against Rs.2,57,000/- along with 6 percent annual interest from the date of institution of the petition has been awarded.
Despite of sufficient service in the office of the respondent, none has taken care of this appeal, hence this Court proceeds to hear the arguments on behalf of the appellants.
It has been argued that deceased Shri Surendra Singh Gwal, was employed with a private contractor Shri Ram Singh Rokaya, who has been examined as PW-3 before the learned Tribunal accepting himself to be a registered 2 government contractor and use to pay Rs.6,000/- per month to the deceased. It can be noticed that nowhere it has been displayed that Shri Gwal was got registered in the office of EPF and the labour department. If employed by Shri Ram Singh Rokaya, so he was just a casual labour and this statement of Shri Rokaya cannot be taken into consideration for determining the base income of Shir Gwal. As regards, the application of the multiplier, the law is settled as contemplated in the case of Shakti Devi vs. New India Insurance company limited reported in 2010(2) UP Page 527. In such case, the Hon'ble Apex Court disclosed the Sarla Verma case even, and held that the multiplier of such person shall be applied, who is higher in age vis-à-vis to the claimant and the deceased. Age of the mother has been disclosed to be 41-42 years. So, looking to that aspect the multiplier has rightly been applied. There is no scope for interference in this judgment.
This appeal is hereby dismissed.
LCR be sent back.
(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 10.03.2017 A.kaur/pooja