Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mamta Devi And Ors vs Saleem And Ors on 24 April, 2023
FAO No. 5847 of 2015 1 2023:PHHC:057576
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 5847 of 2015
DATE OF DECISION :- April 24, 2023
Mamta Devi and others ...Appellants
Versus
Saleem and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present:- Mr. Naveen, Advocate
Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Amit Kundra, Advocate for respondent No. 3.
***
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on account of death of
Rajesh Kumar, aged about 26 years, working as a care taker of harvester
statedly earning Rs.13,000/- per month from that avocation, in a motor
vehicular accident which took place on 29.11.2013 at about 5.00 P.M, statedly
on account of rash and negligent driving of Tata truck bearing registration No.
UP-11T-7205 (hereinafter referred to as offending Truck) by respondent No. 1
Saleem, legal representatives of such deceased namely his wife Smt. Mamta
Devi, aged about 23 years, minor son Master Lavish, mother Smt. Angoori
Devi, all residents of village Kairwali, Tehsil and District Karnal had brought a
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act) against respondents i.e. Saleem, driver, Rajinder Singh
Rana, owner and the The New India Assurance Company Limited through its
Divisional Manager, Karnal, insurer of the offending truck.
After contest, such claim petition was accepted by Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Karnal vide Award dated 20.3.2015 and compensation of
PARVINDER SINGH
2023.04.26 15:22
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment
Chandigarh
FAO No. 5847 of 2015 2 2023:PHHC:057576
Rs.11,36,270/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing
of claim petition till actual realization was awarded to the claimants payable by
all the three respondents jointly and severally.
Finding the compensation to be on lower side, the claimants have
preferred an appeal before this Court, notice of which was given to respondent
No. 3 Insurance Company only. Since liability to pay compensation had been
held to be joint and several by the Tribunal, therefore, issuance of notice to
respondents No. 1 and 2 was dispensed with.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for respondent No. 3 besides going through the record.
The Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and evidence brought on record by the parties, had returned a clear finding that
respondent No. 1 was author of the accident by his rash and negligent driving
of the offending truck resulting in death of Rajesh Kumar. For that reason the
driver, owner and Insurance Company of the offending truck were held to be
liable jointly and severally.
While assessing the compensation the Tribunal has taken age of
deceased to be 27 years and his monthly income to be Rs.6700/- per month.
However, I find that the monthly income so taken is some what on the lower
side. It would be proper and appropriate to take it as Rs.7,000/- per month. It is
so done accordingly. The Tribunal has not made any addition towards future
prospects.
In terms of judgment 'National Insurance Company Limited
Versus Pranay Sethi and Others 2017 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 1009' when the
deceased was below the age group of 40 years an addition of 40% of the salary
is to be made towards future prospects. Doing that monthly income of the
deceased is assessed to be 7000 + 2800 = Rs.9800/-. Making deduction of 1/3rd
PARVINDER SINGH
2023.04.26 15:22
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment
Chandigarh
FAO No. 5847 of 2015 3 2023:PHHC:057576
of the amount towards personal and living expenses of deceased the
dependency of the claimants comes out to 9800-3266 =Rs.6534/- per month. In
that way, the annual dependency of claimants is worked out to 6534 x 12
=Rs.78408/-. Keeping in view the age of the deceased multiplier of 17 is
required to be applied. Doing that the total dependency of claimants comes out
to 78408 x 17=Rs.13,32,936/-. The claimants are entitled to get a sum of
Rs.40,000/- as compensation under Head loss of consortium/filial consortium,
Rs.15,000/- as funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- on account of loss of Estate.
The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1 lakh for loss of consortium which is certainly
on higher side, Rs.1 lakh on account of loss of care and guidance which is not
legally permissible and compensation of Rs.25000/- has been awarded for
funeral expenses when the amount which is payable is Rs.15,000/- only. In that
way under the conventional Heads the claimants are entitled to Rs.70,000/-.
Adding that amount the total compensation is worked out to Rs.14,02,936/-.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.11,36,270/-. In that way the claimants
are entitled to get additional compensation of Rs.2,66,666/- (14,02,936 -
11,36,270) payable by the respondents with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the
date of filing of claim petition till actual realization. The liability to pay this
amount would be joint and several by all the three respondents.
The appeal is partly allowed with costs throughout.
(H.S. MADAAN)
JUDGE
April 24, 2023
p.singh
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
PARVINDER SINGH
2023.04.26 15:22
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment
Chandigarh
