Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sudesh And Ors vs Mukesh And Ors on 23 November, 2022
FAO 6134/2018(O&M) Page 1 of 5
220
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO NO. 6134/2018(O&M)
Date of decision: 23.11.2022
Smt.Sudesh and others
...........Claimants
Vs.
Mukesh and others
...........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Mr.Saurabh Savara, Advocate for
Mr.Sandeep K.Sharma, Advocate for the claimants/appellants
Mr.Vinod Gupta, Advocate for the respondent no.3/
Insurance Company
Nidhi Gupta,J.
This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of compensation
of Rs.11,37,500/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak in
MACT Case No.22 of 2017 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act,1988. Claimants are widow, two minor children and mother of deceased
Satish Grewal.
Brief facts of the case are that on 10.12.2016 Satish Grewal
deceased along with 2nd deceased Surender were going from their Village
Marodi to Village Girawar on a motorcycle and when they reached National
Highway No.10 a car bearing registration No. HR-20S/1283 (offending vehicle)
being driven by Mukesh-respondent no.1 at a very high speed in a rash and
negligent manner came and struck into the motorcycle of the deceased because
of which both of them i.e. deceased Satish Grewal and Surender received fatal
injuries. While Satish Grewal died on the spot, Surender died on the way to
RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.29 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
hospital. At the time of his death, deceased Satish Grewal is stated to be 38 years
of age and working as Salesman with Mahavir trading Company, Hisar Road,
Rohtak and getting salary of Rs.12,000/- per month. It was also stated before
the Tribunal by the claimants that deceased Satish Grewal was also an
Agriculturist and did dairy farming and was earning additional Rs.10,000/- per
month therefrom.
Learned Tribunal on considering the evidence on record
concluded that deceased Satish had died due to rash and negligent driving of the
offending vehicle by respondent no.1-Mukesh. However, Learned Tribunal held
salary of the deceased to be only Rs.7500/- being that of a skilled worker at the
relevant time and deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses in accordance with
the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others v Delhi
Transport Corporation and another, 2009 ACJ 1298 and accordingly held
that dependency of the claimants upon deceased came to Rs.5625/- per month.
By applying multiplier of 15, the deceased being 38 years of age, the Tribunal
calculated the compensation to be Rs.10,12,500/- (Rs.5625x12x15). Besides the
above, the Tribunal held claimants entitled to Rs.1 lac on account of loss of
consortium, Rs.25,000/- as funeral expenses, and granted a total compensation
of Rs.11,37,500/- with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of claim petition till
final realization to be paid by all the respondents jointly and severally.
Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants has argued that
learned Tribunal is in patent error in not awarding future prospects which is in
violation of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance
Company Limited v Pranay Sethi and others (2017) 16 SCC 680. It is further
submitted that the Tribunal has ignored the important evidence in the form of
salary certificate Ex.P-15 produced on record by PW-4 Surender Kumar, who is
RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.29 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
proprietor of the firm Mahavir Trading Company where the deceased was
working, who deposed that the deceased was working as Supervisor in their firm
since last 10 years and was paid Rs.12,000/- per month as salary as is evident
from the salary certificate of the deceased, placed on file as Ex.P-15. Counsel
further submits that Ex.P-15 which is salary certificate shows that deceased was
earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Appellant no.1- Smt. Sudesh, widow of the
deceased appeared as PW2 and tendered in evidence her affidavit as PW2/A and
deposed that the deceased was working in the firm aforementioned and was
earning salary of Rs.12,000/- per month and also earning an additional sum of
Rs.10000/- per month from agriculture and dairy farming.
Learned counsel for the respondent Insurance Company has
vehemently opposed this assertion regarding the salary of the deceased and states
that this evidence is unreliable as PW4 was not a summoned witness and no
affidavit of PW4, Proprietor of the firm has been placed on record in support of
his bald averment; and even no account statement of the firm has been produced
in evidence to prove that salary to the tune of Rs.12,000/- per month was being
disbursed to the deceased. Learned counsel for the respondent very fairly
submits that future prospects ought to be given to the appellants/claimants in
conformity with judgement of the Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi supra.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file.
I find merit in the arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel
for the respondent which have not been refuted by the counsel for the claimants/
appellants. Accordingly, the salary of the deceased is held to be Rs.7500/- per
month and future prospects as follows are added to the compensation awarded
by the ld. Tribunal. Accordingly, computation of compensation admissible to the
claimants is re-worked out as under:-
RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.29 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Rs.7500x12x15x3/4 + 40% = Rs.14,17,500/-
Rs.70,000/-
Rs.14,87,500/-
Less granted by the Tribunal Rs.11,37,500/-
Enhancement Rs. 3,50,000/-
Plus as per Magma Judgment Rs.1,20,000/-
Total enhancement Rs. 4,70,00/-
As regards the payment of interest the same was ordered to be
paid @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till final
realization.
During the pendency of the present appeal, a Coordinate Bench
of this Court passed the following order on 20.9.2019:-
"To verify authenticity of alleged salary certificates of deceased issued by
Shree Mahavir Trading Co., Opp. Old Sariya Mill, near PNB Bank, Hissar
Road, Rohtak, appellant-claimants are directed to produce attendance
register, income tax returns, wages register, muster roll, appointment letter
and all other relevant documents pertaining to service of deceased Satish
Grewal, failing which adverse inference would be drawn against them.
Simultaneously, owner of aforesaid Shree Mahavir Trading Co. be
summoned through Court notice for 9.12.2019 to produce the aforesaid
record, if any.
On 9.12.2019, since the counsel for the appellant sought more
time to comply with the aforesaid order dated 20.9.2019, the case was adjourned
to 8.5.2020 for consideration with the direction that "It is made clear that in case
of enhancement in compensation, appellants shall not be entitled to interest from
today till next date of hearing. Registry is directed to give a note with red ink in
this respect on the page of memo of parties." The Registry has duly complied
with the said order. However, till date neither the appellants/claimants have
RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.29 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
produced the documents contained in the order dated 20.9.2019 nor the owner
of Shree Mahavir Trading Company has put in appearance despite service.
In view of the above, the rate of interest is maintained @ 9% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till final realization, by
excluding the period from 9.12.2019 to 23.11.2022.
Application(s),if any, also stand disposed of.
(Nidhi Gupta)
Judge
23.11.2022
Joshi
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable Yes/No
RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.29 17:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
