Pavneet Singh & Anr. vs Sahi Ram
2009 Latest Caselaw 2231 Del

53
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                       +      FAO No. 208/1991

%                               Date of decision: 25th May, 2009

      PAVNEET SINGH & ANR.                ..... Appellants
                    Through : Mr. T.K. Chawla, Adv.

                  versus


      SAHI RAM                                  ..... Respondent
                           Through : (name not given), Adv.

CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may                   Yes
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?                  Yes

3.      Whether the judgment should be                          Yes
        reported in the Digest?


                            JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal, whereby compensation of Rs.1,15,200/- has been

awarded to the appellants. The appellant seeks enhancement of

the award amount.

2. The accident dated 29.04.1980 resulted in the death of

Gurcharan Singh, aged 31 years at the time of the accident. The

deceased was survived by his widow and two minor children who

filed the claim petition before the Learned Tribunal.

3. At the time of the accident, the deceased was carrying on

the business of tent house and installation of electrical

connections in the name of M/S A-one Shamiana House at Model

Town. The occupation and income of the deceased was proved by

the widow of the deceased, who appeared as PW-3 and deposed

that her husband was carrying on the business in the name and

style of M/S A-one Shamiana House at F-14/47, Model Town, Delhi

and was earning about Rs.2,000/- p.m and he used to give

Rs.500/- to 600/- for running household expenses and whenever

she needed more amount, he used to give her more amount. She

further deposed that after the death of her husband, business

was closed and nobody attended to it. She also produced cash

book, order book, register of employees, bill book and ledger

book of the business of the deceased.

4. The claimants also produced the partner of the deceased as

PW-1 who deposed that the business was in partnership for about

three years till 1978 when the partners got separated from the

business which was thereafter carried by the deceased alone as a

proprietor. PW-1 produced the receipt of payment made on

account of the dissolution of the partnership as Ex-PW-1/A. PW-1

also proved the assessment order of the firm as Ex-PW-1/B.

5. The claimants produced another witness PW-2 who proved

that the deceased was running the tent house business in the

name of M/S A-one Shamiana House at Model Town and the

deceased had 3-4 employees, who were being paid Rs.300/- to

Rs.400/- each per month.

6. The Learned Tribunal considered the Income-tax

assessment order Ex-PW-1/B in which the income of the firm had

been shown about Rs.25,000/- for the year 1977-1978. However,

the learned Tribunal took the income of the deceased to be

Rs.10,000/- being 40% of the assessed income. The Learned

Tribunal took the dependency of the claimants to Rs.600/- p.m

and applied the multiplier of 16 to compute the loss of

dependency on Rs.1,15,200/-. No amount has been awarded for

loss of love and affection, loss of estate, loss of consortium and

general expenses.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged the

following grounds at the hearing of the appeal:-

(i) The income of the deceased be taken at Rs.25,000/- per

annum because the partnership firm was dissolved in the year

1978 and the deceased was carrying on the business as a sole

proprietor from 1978 till his death on 29.04.1980 when the

business was finally closed.

(ii) The multiplier be enhanced.

(iii) Compensation be awarded for loss of love and affection,

loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.

8. With respect to the occupation and income of the deceased,

it has been proved by PW-1 that the deceased carried on the

business of tent house in the name of M/S A-one Shamiana House

at Model Town in the partnership from 1975 -1978 and the

partnership were dissolved in the year 1978, which has been

proved by Ex-PW-1/A. After 1978, the deceased carried on the

business as a sole proprietor till his death. The deceased had 3-4

employees drawing salary of Rs.300/- to Rs.400/- each per

month. The income of the business for the year 1977-1978 was

Rs.25,000/- per annum. Since the deceased was carrying on the

business as a sole proprietor of the firm, the Learned Tribunal

was in error in taking 40% of the income of the deceased. The

income of the deceased is, therefore, taken to be Rs.25,000/- per

annum. 1/3rd is deducted towards the personal expenses of the

deceased and the dependency of the claimants is taken to be

Rs.16,667/- per annum.

9. The Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 16. The

Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act provided the

multiplier of 17. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

recent case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation,

2009 (6) Scale 129 decided on 15th April, 2009 has corrected

the multiplier provided in the Second Schedule and the

appropriate multiplier as per the said judgment for the age of 31

years is 16. The learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 16,

which does not call for any interference. The loss of dependency

by applying the multiplier of 16 is computed to be Rs.2,66,672/-

(Rs.16,667/- X 16).

10. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for

loss of love and affection, loss of estate, loss of consortium and

general expenses. Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards the loss of

consortium, Rs.10,000/- towards the loss of estate and

Rs.10,000/- towards the loss of love and affection and Rs.5,000/-

towards the funeral expenses. The total compensation is

computed as Rs.3,01,672/-.

11. The learned Tribunal has awarded the interest @9% per

annum. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of

rate of interest on the ground that the bank rate of interest at the

time of the award was 12% per annum. The rate of interest is

enhanced from 9% per annum to 12% per annum from the date

of filing of the petition till the award of the learned Tribunal on

06.05.1991. However, from the date of award up to 31st

December, 2001, the rate of interest shall be 9% per annum and

from 1st January, 2002 up to date of payment, the rate of interest

shall be 7.5% per annum.

12. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced

from Rs.1,15,200/- to Rs.3,01,672/- along with interest @12% per

annum from the date of filing of petition till 6 th May, 1991, @9%

per annum from 7th May, 1991 up to 31st December, 2001 and

@7.5% per annum from 1st January, 2002 till date of payment.

Appellants No.1 and 2 shall have equal share in enhanced

amount.

13. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced award

amount along with interest amount with the learned Tribunal

within 30 days. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, the

learned Tribunal shall release 50% of the enhanced award

amount to appellants No.1 and 2 and the remaining 50% of the

enhanced award amount along with interest amount is directed

to be kept in fixed deposit for five years on which periodical

interest be paid to appellants No.1 and 2 but no loan, advance or

withdrawal be permitted without prior permission of the learned

Tribunal.

14. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for the

parties under signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J

MAY 25, 2009 rs