Babli Dixit & Anr vs Satendra Kumar & Ors (Iffco Tokio ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 7363 Del

$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                 Date of Decision: 14th December, 2018

+     MAC.APP. 163/2018

      BABLI DIXIT & ANR                                  ..... Appellants
                     Through:         Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate

                         versus

      SATENDRA KUMAR & ORS
      (IFFCO TOKIO GEN INS CO LTD )            ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate for
                              Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate for R3.

                            JUDGEMENT

1. The appellants have challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby the compensation of Rs.13,80,000/- has been awarded to appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.

2. On 24th January, 2015 at about 12:15 A.M., Ravi Dixit was returning to his home along with his friend Gaurav on a motorcycle from Indirapuram, Ghaziabad when they were hit from behind by truck bearing No.HR 55K 8094 in front of MR Hyundai, Shalimar Garden, Sahibabad which resulted in the death of Ravi Dixit. The deceased was aged 20 years at the time of accident and was a student of second year in B.Tech (ME) in Krishna Engineering College, Ghaziabad. The deceased was survived by his parents who claimed compensation.

3. The Claims Tribunal took minimum wages of Rs.11,414/- per month in respect of a graduate, added 50% towards future prospects, deducted 1/2nd

towards the personal expenses of the deceased and applied the multiplier of 11 according to the age of mother to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.11,29,986/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.50,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is Rs.13,79,986/- (rounded off to Rs.13,80,000/-).

4. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of hearing that the deceased was aged 20 years and the appropriate multiplier at the age of 20 is 18 whereas the Claims Tribunal had applied multiplier of 11. It is further submitted that the earning capacity of the deceased be taken as Rs.25,500/- considering that the deceased was a student of second year of B.Tech (ME). Reliance is placed on National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dilip Kumar, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 9263.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 urged at the time of hearing that the Claims Tribunal has rightly applied the minimum wages to compute the compensation. It is submitted that the deceased was pursuing B.Tech (ME) from an institute at Ghaziabad and no evidence has been led with respect to earning capacity of the students who passed out from there. It is further submitted that the future prospects be reduced from 50% to 40%. It is further submitted that the compensation for love and affection is no more a permissible head. It is further submitted that the compensation towards loss of estate and funeral expenses be reduced to Rs.15,000/- each. Reliance is placed on National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pranay Sethi (Supra).

6. The law with respect to the earning capacity of a student pursuing a professional course is well-settled that the Claims Tribunal has to assess the

earning capacity of the deceased considering the nature of the professional course being pursued by the deceased and the prospects of his income after completing the course. The relevant judgments on this principle are as under:

6.1 In Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Deo Patodi, (2009) 13 SCC 123, the accident dated 12th June, 2003 resulted in the death of a 22 year old brilliant student who had completed Business Administration Course and had an offer of job from a US based company at the time of the accident. The Claims Tribunal took his earning capacity as Rs.18,000/- per month. The Supreme Court enhanced the earning capacity of the deceased from Rs.18,000/- per month to Rs.25,000/- per month.

6.2 In New India Assurance Company Limited v. Ganga Devi, MANU/DE/3623/2009, the accident dated 12th August, 2003 resulted in the death of an MBBS graduate who was doing internship and was getting a stipend of Rs.5,000/- per month. The Claims Tribunal took minimum wages of Rs.3,543/- per month in respect of a graduate. This Court rejected the principle of the minimum wages applied by the Claims Tribunal and took the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.18,000/- per month and added 50% towards future prospects. This Court enhanced the compensation from Rs.9,60,352/- to Rs.21,36,000/-.

6.3 In Ramesh Chand Joshi v. New India Assurance Company Limited MAC. APP. 212-13/2006 decided on 20th January, 2010, the accident dated 30th July, 2004 resulted in the death of a first year student of B. Tech in Delhi College of Engineering. The Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.1,875/- per month which was challenged before this Court. This Court again rejected the principle of the minimum wages applied by the

Claims Tribunal. Following the Supreme Court judgment in Deo Patodi, (supra), this Court assessed the earning capacity of the deceased after completing the graduation course to be Rs.38,333/- per month and the compensation was enhanced from Rs.3,25,000/- to Rs.22,78,980/-. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"7. The learned Tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs.22,500/- per annum i.e. Rs.1,875/- per month which is less than even the minimum wages of a daily wager. The approach and finding of the learned Tribunal is absurd and without any basis. The law in this regard is well settled by catena of judgments. The minimum wages are permissible to be taken where the deceased is illiterate and does not possess any professional or technical qualification. Where the deceased is educated or is pursuing the professional course, income has to be taken on the basis of his earning. Reference in this regard may be made to judgment of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Deo Pataudi, 2009 (8) Scale 194, in which case the deceased aged 22 years was a student having a brilliant career and offer of employment from a US Based Company at the time of accident. The learned Tribunal took his earning capacity to be Rs.18,000/- per month. The High Court in appeal upheld the earning capacity of the deceased at 18,000/- per month. The Hon'ble Supreme Court enhanced the earning capacity of the deceased from Rs.18,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per month.

8. Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that the learned Tribunal shall conduct an inquiry into the claim petition. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that the learned Tribunal shall follow such summary procedure as it deem fit to conduct such an inquiry. The inquiry stipulated in Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act is different from the civil trial. The learned Tribunal has not conducted any inquiry whatsoever for assessing the earning capacity of the deceased. Be that as it may, this Court in appellate jurisdiction has the same power of conducting such an enquiry into this matter and, therefore, vide order dated 26th November, 2009, this Court issued a notice to the Dean of Delhi College of Engineering,

Bawana to place on record the average salary of a fresh Engineering graduate of Delhi College of Engineering, in pursuance to which the Joint Registrar of Delhi College of Engineering (now known as Delhi Technological University) has filed an affidavit along with the chart of average salary drawn by a fresh engineering graduates of Delhi College of Engineering. The chart contains the names of different Companies and salaries offered by them in the year 2009 to fresh graduates in Bio-Technology from Delhi College of Engineering.

xxx xxx xxx

9. The average salary of a graduate in Bio-Technology from Delhi College of Engineering during 2009 is 4.6 lacs per annum. The chart further shows that there were 18 eligible students who all got the job offers and the placement was 100%. The chart further shows that the minimum salary offered was Rs.3. lacs per annum and highest salary offered to an Engineering graduate in Bio-Technology was Rs.9 lacs per annum. 10. From the inquiry conducted by this Court as to the earning capacity of the deceased, it is held that the earning capacity of the deceased after completing graduation course would have been Rs.4.6 lacs per annum i.e. Rs.38,333/- per month."

(Emphasis Supplied) 6.4 In HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rattan Kumar Dwivedi, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9874, the accident dated 21st July, 2008 resulted in the death of a national level sportsperson who was a student of B.

Com. (Hons.). The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.10,40,000/- by taking the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- per month which was challenged on the ground that minimum wages should have been applied by the Claims Tribunal. Applying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, AIR 2012 SC 100, this Court rejected the application of

minimum wages to such cases. Considering the brilliant record of the student as a sportsperson, this Court determined the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.25,000/- per month and enhanced the compensation from Rs.10,40,000/- to Rs.24,50,000/-. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"14. In the present case, the deceased Apoorva Dwivedi was a student of B.Com (Hons.) at Bharti College, Delhi University. She was a sports person having won 86 prizes/certificates in athletics, track and field, gymnastics, baseball, soft ball, basketball, cricket etc. The deceased had secured second place in team event at 40th Delhi State Gymnastics Championship, 2001; best athlete of the year 2003-2004 at school and zonal level and first position in baseball in 52nd National School Games conducted by School Games Federation of India held from 23rd December to 28th December, 2006. The deceased was sports captain of Holy Child Senior Secondary School, Tagore Garden, New Delhi for the academic year 2007-08. Judicial notice is taken of the notifications for government job for sports persons as well as advertisements in private jobs for sports persons, under which a graduate sports person can secure a job with a job in the pay scale of Rs.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/- per month. Considering that the deceased was a sports person with an extraordinary talent in various sports, namely, athletics, track and field, gymnastics, baseball, soft ball, basketball, cricket etc. and having been awarded 86 prizes/certificates, it is presumed that the deceased would have earned Rs.25,000/- per month after completing her graduation. Deducting 50% towards the personal expenses of the deceased and applying the multiplier of 14 according to the age of her mother, the loss of dependency is computed as Rs.21,00,000/- [(Rs.25,000- 50%)x12x14]. The compensation for loss of love and affection is enhanced from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-; and compensation for pain and suffering is enhanced from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. Adding Rs.1,30,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses, total compensation is computed as Rs.24,50,000/- [21,00,000/-

+ 1,00,000/- + 1,30,000/- + 1,00,000/- + 20,000/-]. The Claims Tribunal has awarded interest @ 7.5% per annum which is on a lower side considering that the Supreme Court as well as this Court are consistently awarding interest @ 9% per annum. The rate of interest is enhanced from 7.5% to 9% per annum."

6.5 In HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Lalta Devi, 2015 ACJ 2526, the accident dated 19th June, 2011 resulted in the death of a third year student of B. Tech. The Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.19,50,000/- by taking the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.25,000/- per month. The insurance company and the claimants both challenged the award before this Court. This Court held the earning capacity of the deceased to be Rs.26,815/- per month by relying on the basic pay of a junior engineer and the compensation amount was enhanced from Rs.19,50,000/- to Rs.22,94,871/-.

6.6 In United India Insurance Company Limited v. Anita, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 11152, the accident dated 16th June, 2009 resulted in the death of a 21 year old student of B. Tech. (Mechanical and Automation Engineering). The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.34,65,689/- by taking the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.26,815/- per month and 50% future prospects thereon, which was challenged by the insurance company. This Court upheld the award of the Claims Tribunal and dismissed the appeal. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"5. The Claims Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs.26,851/- following the judgment of this Court in HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Lalta Devi, 2015 ACJ 2526 in which this Court took the income of a B.Tech third year student in a similar university as Rs.26,851/- according to the salary drawn by a Junior Engineer. The learned Tribunal has also taken into consideration that the deceased had passed the

5th semester in December 2008 and had received the approval for six weeks industrial training with Indian Airlines. The Claims Tribunal also considered the mark sheets of the deceased for 3rd, 4th and 5th semester along with certificate of excellence for 3rd semester and deceased had stood first in the 3rd semester examination in December, 2007. The Claims Tribunal also considered the statement of PW-2 who was a class fellow of the deceased and had initially joined Maxim Group in 2011 at a monthly salary of Rs.16,000/- as Production Engineer and thereafter, another company with a package of Rs.4,34,000/- per annum with 18% increment in the salary.

6. This Court is of the view that the income of the deceased computed by the Claims Tribunal and the future prospects added thereon are fair and reasonable and does not warrant any interference."

6.7 In Bharti AXA General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Upender Kumar Shastri, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 7855, the accident dated 01st September, 2014 resulted in the death of an 18 years old student of B.A. (Hons.) in Kamla Nehru College, Delhi University. The Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.30,05,000/- by taking the earning capacity as Rs.40,000/- per month. This Court held that the earning capacity of Rs.40,000/- per month was on higher side and reduced the earning capacity of the deceased to Rs.27,600/-. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"2. The accident dated 01st September, 2014 resulted in the death of Deepti. The deceased was aged 18 years at the time of the accident and was a student of B.A. (Hons) in Kamla Nehru College, Delhi University. The Claims Tribunal took the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.40,000/- considering her brilliant academic record and her aspiration to join Indian Police Service. Relevant portion of the award is reproduced hereunder: -

"As far as the income of the deceased is concerned, admittedly she was a student when she

met with an accident and died. In order to assess her notional income her academic record is required to be seen. PW-1 in his affidavit has alleged that he deceased was doing BA hon. 1 st year course from Kamla Nehru College, she was brilliant in her studies and extraordinary in sport and since her childhood she was maintaining a good academic record and was doing very well at sports at state and national level and secured top positions. It is stated that the deceased has secured 90% marks in her XIIth class and she secured 99% marks in Geography and secured all India top position, she was congratulated by the then HRD Minster Smt. Smriti Zuben Irani vide letter dated 02.06.2014 i.e. Ex.PW1/5. It is stated that the deceased was sincere, hard working student and she was preparing for civil services examination as she wanted to join Indian Police Services. Her educational and sports record were proved as Ex.PW1/6 (Colly) which shows that the deceased was a brilliant student, both in education as well as in sports and it can be safely assumed that she was having a bright future. Her various certificates of merits have been proved on record with respect to her various achievements in sports and education. But it is known to all that life is full of probabilities and improbabilities and nothing can be said with certainly about anyone's future and the same is with the deceased also but having regard to her achievements in her educational carrier as well as in supports and the fact that she was studying in well reputed college of Delhi University, it can be said with certainly that had she lived longer she must have achieved success in her life. In the totality of facts and circumstances, of the case, the evidence on record and having regard to the uncertainities of life and the fact that the deceased was a girl and she would have

married after completing her education and establishing in her carrier in all probabilities and the fact that her parents were not financially dependent upon her at the time of her death, I am of the opinion that it cannot be assumed at this stage that she in all circumstances, would have cleared civil services examination in future, but it can be said with some certainly that even if she would not have cleared he civil services examination, she would have had a great future.

Even if she would have worked in a private sector or even if she would have cleared a clerical exam in Govt. Sector, after completing her education she must have got an initial salary of Rs.40,000/- per month. Therefore, the loss of estate would come to Rs.40,000/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.86,40,000/-.

(Emphasis supplied)"

xxx xxx xxx

4. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC APP. 376/2017 urged at the time of hearing that the minimum wages be taken into consideration to compute the compensation. It is submitted that the earning capacity of Rs.40,000/- per month taken by the Claims Tribunal is on a higher side.

xxx xxx xxx

6. The present case relates to an accident dated 01st September, 2014 whereas Rattan Kumar Dwivedi (supra) related to the accident of the year 2008. This Court is of the view that the earning capacity of Rs.40,000/- taken by the Claims Tribunal is on a higher side. The earning capacity of the deceased is reduced to Rs.27,600/- per month. The deceased was unmarried and, therefore, 50% has to be deducted towards her personal expenses. The deceased was 18 years of age, therefore the multiplier of 18 has to be applied according to the age of the deceased in terms of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 2017 SCC Online SC 1270."

(Emphasis Supplied)

6.8 In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dilip Kumar (Supra), the accident dated 01st March, 2012 resulted in the death of a 22 years old student of B.Sc. (Nautical Science) of Directorate General of Shipping and Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU). The Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.75,40,621/- by taking the earning capacity as Rs.40,000/- per month. This Court held that the earning capacity of Rs.40,000/- per month was on higher side and reduced the earning capacity of the deceased to Rs. 25,500/-. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"1. On 1st March, 2012 at about 1:30 A.M, Prateek Kumar and his friends were going from Connaught Place to Saket in a Mahindra Scorpio car bearing No.HR-11C-6677 being driven by respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 lost control of the vehicle near Gate No.1 of National Gallery of Modern Art, India Gate Outer Circle, Delhi due to which the vehicle struck against a tree and turned turtle. The police registered FIR No.33/2012 dated 1st March, 2012 against respondent no.3 under Sections 279/337/338 of IPC at P.S. Tilak Marg.

xxx xxx xxx

5. Prateek was aged 22 years at the time of the accident. He passed Senior Secondary School in the year 2008 with 82% marks and was pursuing B.Sc.(Nautical Science) six semester course jointly conducted by Directorate General of Shipping and Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU). Prateek had completed the fifth semester of the six semester course. Prateek completed Pre-Sea Cadet course from Maritime Institute, Mumbai in the first and second semesters. Prateek completed 18 months training with Shipping Corporation of India in the third, fourth and fifth semesters and was getting a stipend of Rs.10,000/- per month plus other perks.

xxx xxx xxx

20. In the present case, the deceased was a student of B.Sc. (Nautical Science). The deceased had successfully completed the Pre-Sea Cadet Course from Maritimes Training Institute

and eighteen month On-Board training with Shipping Corporation of India and was getting stipend of Rs.10,000/- per month excluding perks. On successful completion of B.Sc. (Nautical Science), the deceased would have had a successful career in Merchant Navy. As per the terms and conditions of the appointment of a fresh graduate, Shipping Corporation of India pays wages of Rs.1,03,620/- per month (Rs.3,454/- per day). This Court is of the view that the earning capacity of the deceased be taken as Rs.25,500/- per month. Applying the well- settled principles of law laid down by Supreme Court and this Court in the aforesaid cases, the earning capacity of Rs.40,000/- taken by the Claims Tribunal is reduced to Rs.25,500/- per month.

21. Taking the income of the deceased as Rs.25,500/- per month, adding 40% towards future prospects, deducting 50% towards his personal expenses, and applying the multiplier of 18, the loss of dependency is computed as Rs.38,55,600/-

22. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.11,20,000/- towards loss of income during treatment which is not permissible because the loss of dependency has been awarded to the claimants on the multiplier method and is, therefore, set aside.

23. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.32,95,621/- towards medical treatment which is based on sufficient evidence. There is no infirmity in the medical expenditure awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

24. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.1 lakh towards loss of love and affection which is not a permissible head in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) and is therefore, set aside. The compensation under the head of loss of estate is enhanced from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- and funeral expenses are reduced from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.15,000/- in terms of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Rs.9,400/- is awarded to the claimants as the cost of litigation.

25. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,50,000/- towards conveyance and attendant charges which is just, fair and reasonable considering the deceased died about 27 months

after the date of accident and was under constant medical treatment during this period.

26. The claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.75,40,621/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of the claim application............"

7. There is no merit in the contention of the insurance company that the compensation be computed by taking the minimum wages of Rs.11,414/- per month as the income of the deceased. The law is well settled that it is not mandatory to resort to minimum wages to compute the compensation in each and every case. Reference is made to Municipal Corporation of Delhi v.

Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (supra), in which 59 persons died in 1997 and the Supreme Court granted compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the victims above 20 years of age by taking their income as Rs.8,333/- per month whereas the minimum wages at the relevant time were less than Rs.2600/- per month. The relevant portion of the judgment is as under:

"38. ... It can be by way of making monetary amounts for the wrong done or by way of exemplary damages, exclusive of any amount recoverable in a civil action based on tortuous liability. But in such a case it is improper to assume admittedly without any basis, that every person who visits a cinema theatre and purchases a balcony ticket should be of a high income group person. In the year 1997, Rs. 15,000 per month was rather a high income. The movie was a new movie with patriotic undertones. It is known that zealous movie goers, even from low income groups, would not mind purchasing a balcony ticket to enjoy the film on the first day itself. To make a sweeping assumption that every person who purchased a balcony class ticket in 1997 should have had a monthly income of Rs. 15,000 and on that basis apply high multiplier of 15 to determine the compensation at a uniform rate of Rs. 18 lakhs in the case of persons above the age of 20 years and Rs. 15 lakhs for persons below that age, as a public law remedy, may not be proper. While awarding compensation to a large group of persons, by

way of public law remedy, it will be unsafe to use a high income as the determinative factor. The reliance upon Neelabati Behera (AIR 1993 SC 1960 : 1993 AIR SCW 2366) in this behalf is of no assistance as that case related to a single individual and there was specific evidence available in regard to the income. Therefore, the proper course would be to award a uniform amount keeping in view the principles relating to award of compensation in public law remedy cases reserving liberty to the legal heirs of deceased victims to claim additional amount wherever they were not satisfied with the amount awarded. Taking note of the facts and circumstances, the amount of compensation awarded in public law remedy cases, and the need to provide a deterrent, we are of the view that award of Rs. 10 lakhs in the case of persons aged above 20 years and Rs. 7.5 lakhs in regard to those who were 20 years or below as on the date of the incident, would be appropriate. We do not propose to disturb the award of Rs. 1 lakh each in the case of injured. The amount awarded as compensation will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of writ petition as ordered by the High Court, reserve liberty to the victims or the LRs. of the victims as the case may be to seek higher remedy wherever they are not satisfied with the compensation. Any increase shall be borne by the Licensee (theatre owner) exclusively."

(Emphasis Supplied)

8. In Uphaar Tragedy (supra), the Supreme Court has awarded Rs.10 lakhs to the victims aged more than 20 years and Rs.7.5 lakhs to the victims aged less than 20 years. In that case, the multiplier of 15 was applied and 1/3rd was deducted towards the personal expenses which mean that the Court has assumed the income of the victims aged more than 20 years to be Rs.8,333/- per month and that of victims aged less than 20 years to be Rs.6,249/- per month. The calculation of the compensation would be as under :-

For victims aged more than 20 years:-

(Rs.8,333/- less 1/3 rd)x 12 x 15 = Rs.10 lakhs. For victims aged less than 20 years:-

(Rs.6249/- less 1/3rd) x 15 = Rs.7.5 lakhs.

9. It is relevant to note that the Uphaar Tragedy (supra), took place on 13th June, 1997 and the minimum wages at the relevant time were less than Rs.2600/- but neither the Division Bench of this Court nor Supreme Court resorted to minimum wages to compute the compensation, although neither the income nor the occupation of the victims was proved.

10. In the present case, the deceased was a second year student of B.Tech (ME) from Krishna Engineering College, Ghaziabad. Applying the well settled principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court and this Court in abovementioned cases, the earning capacity of the deceased is taken as Rs.20,000/- per month. The Claims Tribunal has taken future prospects at 50% which are reduced to 40%. The Claims Tribunal had applied multiplier of 11 whereas the appropriate multiplier according to the age of the deceased is 18. The multiplier is, therefore, enhanced from 11 to 18. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection which is no more a permissible head and is, therefore, set aside. The compensation for loss of estate and funeral expenses are reduced to Rs.15,000/- each in terms of principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Limited v. Pranay Sethi (Supra).

11. Taking the income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per month, adding 40% towards future prospects, deducting 50% towards his personal expenses and applying multiplier of 18, the loss of dependency is computed as Rs.30,24,000/-. Adding 15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, the total compensation is computed as Rs.30,54,000/-.

12. The appeal is allowed and the compensation amount is enhanced from Rs.13,80,000/- to Rs.30,54,000/- along with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 11th March, 2015.

13. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount with the Registrar General of this Court within four weeks.

14. List for disbursement of the enhanced amount to the appellants on 18th January, 2019.

15. This Court, vide order dated 12th February, 2018, directed respondent No.3 to confirm whether the award amount has been deposited with the Claims Tribunal and if so, the particulars of the deposit of the award amount to be furnished by respondent No.3 and if the amount had not been deposited by respondent No.3, the respondent No.3 was directed to deposit the award amount with the Registrar General of this Court within four weeks. Respondent No.3 is again directed to confirm whether the award amount has been deposited with the Claims Tribunal and if so, the particulars of the deposit of the award amount and if the amount has not been deposited by respondent No.3 till date, the respondent No.3 shall deposit the award amount with the Registrar General of this Court within four weeks.

16. This Court vide order dated 12th February, 2018 further directed the Claims Tribunal to send the status of the amount released in terms of the award as well as the particulars of the FDRs in which the balance amount has been kept along with copies of the FDRs. The Claims Tribunal is again directed to send the status of the amount released in terms of the award as well as the particulars of the FDRs in which the balance amount has been kept along with copies of the FDRs.

17. This Court, vide order dated 12th February, 2018, directed the appellants to remain present in Court along with the passbooks of their savings bank accounts near the place of their residence as well as PAN card and Aadhaar Card with necessary endorsement on the passbooks that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to appellants without the permission of this Court. The appellants are again directed to produce the original passbooks of their savings bank accounts with the necessary endorsement on the next date of hearing.

18. Copy of this Judgment be sent to District Judge who shall ensure the compliance of this Order.

19. Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signatures of the Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J.

DECEMBER 14, 2018 ak