Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mohinder Kaur And Ors vs Harmeet Singh And Ors on 6 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No.5465 of 2006
Reserved on : 26.08.2022
Date of Decision : 06.09.2022
Mohinder Kaur and Others ....Appellants
VERSUS
Hasmeet Singh and Others ....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Onkar Singh Batalvi, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for respondent No.3
ALKA SARIN, J.
The present appeal has been preferred by the claimants against
the award dated 27.07.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').
The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the claimants
filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988
stating therein that their 19 years old son Hardeep Singh was going on his
motor cycle bearing No.PB-1-AT-0437 towards Y.P.S. Chowk, Patiala. He
was followed by Ranjit Singh s/o Dar Amarjit Singh Cheema. When
Hardeep Singh reached near the gate of Military Headquarter, Patiala then
the offending Jeep bearing No.PB-57-8112 came from Y.P.S. Chowk,
Patiala driving at a very high speed and on the wrong side of the road, and
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
hit the motor-cycle of the deceased, Hardeep Singh. It was stated that the
deceased was going on his motorcycle at a normal speed. The offending Jeep
crushed the head of Hardeep Singh and he succumbed to his injuries at the
spot. It was pleaded in the claim petition that the deceased was a young man
of 19 years of age and a second year student of MBBS studying in Rajindra
Medical College and Hospital, Patiala. It was also averred that he was doing
tuition job work and was earning Rs.8000/- to Rs.10000/- per month from
tuition. It was further stated that the deceased was a topper and stood 3rd in
PMT test in Ludhiana City. He was a very good football as well as cricket
player. The claim petition was contested by respondent Nos.1 and 2 who
filed their joint written statement denying that Hardeep Singh was 19 years
of age and further that he was self-employed and was earning Rs.8000/- to
Rs.10000/- per month. It was further averred that respondent No.1 had
falsely been implicated in the case. Respondent No.3, alongwith the usual
pleas, raised the plea that respondent No.1 was not driving the offending
Jeep in the course of his employment with the owner and insured and as
such the insurance company was not liable to pay the compensation. Further,
it was stated that the offending Jeep was not having a valid registration
certificate, route permit and fitness certificate at the time of the alleged
accident.
Based on the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were
framed :
1. Whether Hardeep Singh Sekhon died in Motor
Vehicular accident due to rash and negligent
driving of Jeep No.PB-57-8112 by respondent No.1
? OPP
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
2. Whether the respondent No.1 was not having a
valid and effective driving license at the time of
accident, if so, its effects ? OPR
3. Whether Hardeep Singh deceased was not having a
valid driving license at the time of accident, if so,
its effects ? OPR
4. To what amount and from whom, the claimants are
entitled to receive compensation ? OPP
5. Relief.
The Tribunal on issue No.1 held that the accident stood proved
resulting in the death of Hardeep Singh. Qua the amount of compensation,
the Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs.4 lakhs.
Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants while relying on
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashvinbhai Jayantilal
Modi Vs. Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma & Anr. [2014 (4) RCR
(Civil) 543] has contended that in a similar case where the deceased was 19
years of age and was pursuing the professional course of medicine and had
died in a motor vehicular accident, the notional income of the deceased was
assessed as Rs.25,000/- per month. Further reliance has been placed upon
the judgment of Adarsh Gupta & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd &
Ors. [2021 SCC OnLine J&K 732] to contend that in the said case also the
deceased was a medical student and the Court relying upon the judgment of
Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi's case (supra) had assessed the income of the
deceased as Rs.25,000/- per month. Learned counsel would further contend
that based on the notional income, multiplier of 18 and future prospects @
40% ought to have been applied. Further, no amount has been awarded
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
under the conventional heads. Even the claimants who are parents and
unmarried sister of the deceased have not been granted any amount under
the Head consortium.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents have
vehemently contended that the amount awarded is sufficient inasmuch as
there was no evidence on the record qua the income of the deceased.
Heard.
The deceased in the present case was a brilliant medical
student. The Tribunal ought to have taken prospective income of the
deceased and awarded compensation in accordance with law.
In the case of Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi (supra), the
Supreme Court held as under :
"9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In our considered view, the deceased was 19 years old
and was pursuing his medical degree with good marks
at the time of the accident. With respect to the future
income of students pursuing professional courses we
refer to Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance
Co. Ltd. and Anr.[3], wherein this Court held as under :
"14. On completion of Bachelor of Engineering
(Mechanical) from the prestigious institute like
B.I.T., it can be reasonably assumed that he would
have got a good job. The appellant has stated in his
evidence that in the campus interview he was
selected by Tata as well as Reliance Industries and
was offered pay package of Rs.3,50,000/- per
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
annum. Even if that is not accepted for want of any
evidence in support thereof, there would not have
been any difficulty for him in getting some decent
job in the private sector. Had he decided to join
government service and got selected, he would
have been put in the pay scale for Assistant
Engineer and would have at least earned
Rs.60,000/- per annum. Wherever he joined, he had
a fair chance of some promotion and remote
chance of some high position. But uncertainties of
life cannot be ignored taking relevant factors into
consideration. In our opinion, it is fair and
reasonable to assess his future earnings at
Rs.60,000/- per annum taking the salary and
allowances payable to an Assistant Engineer in
public employment as the basis...."
The Tribunal and the High Court have not taken into
proper consideration that the deceased was a student of
medicine at the time of the accident while determining
his future income. The courts below have wrongly
ascertained the future income of the deceased at only
Rs.18,000/- per month, which in our view is too less for
a medical graduate these days. Therefore, the courts
below have failed in following the principles laid down
by this Court in this aspect in the above case. The
deceased was a diligent and outstanding student of
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
medicine who could have pursued his M.D. after his
graduation and reached greater heights. Today, medical
practice is one of the most sought after and rewarding
professions. With the tremendous increase in demand
for medical professionals, their salaries are also on the
rise. Therefore, we have no doubt in ascertaining the
future income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/- p.m. i.e.
Rs.3,00,000/- p.a."
The said judgment was followed in case of Adarsh Gupta
(supra). The judgment of the Supreme Court pertains to the year 2014
wherein the income of the deceased, who was 19 years of age and was a
medical student, was notionally assessed as Rs.25,000/- per month. The
accident in the present case pertains to the year 2003. Therefore, keeping in
mind the law laid down in the cases of Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi (supra)
and Adarsh Gupta (supra) the notional income of the deceased is assessed
as Rs.20,000/- per month. As per law laid down by the Supreme Court in
Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.
[2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77]; National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay
Sethi & Ors. [2017 (16) Supreme Court Cases 680]; Magma General
Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors.
[2018 (18) SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam MS
General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021 (4) RCR (Civil) 642], the
compensation is re-worked out as under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly income of the Rs.20,000/-
TRIPTI SAINI
deceased
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
2 Annual income of the deceased Rs.2,40,000/- (20000x12)
3 Annual income after 50% Rs.1,20,000/-
deduction towards personal
expenses
4 Addition of 40% on account Rs.1,68,000/- (120000+48000)
of future prospects
6 Amount of compensation Rs.3024000/- (168000x18)
7 Loss of estate Rs.16500/-
8 Funeral expenses Rs.16500/-
10 Loss of consortium
Parental Rs.88000/- (44000x2)
Filial Rs.44000/-
11 Grand Total Rs.3189000/-
Difference of compensation Rs.27,89,000/-
(3189000-400000)
The enhanced amount of Rs.27,89,000/- over and above the amount already
awarded by the Tribunal shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim petition till realization. It is further clarified that the
entire amount shall be released to the claimants.
In view of the above discussion, the above-captioned appeal is
allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
06.09.2022 ( ALKA SARIN )
tripti JUDGE
NOTE : Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking
Whether reportable : YES/NO
TRIPTI SAINI
2022.09.06 17:38
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
