Punjab-Haryana High Court
Charan Kaur vs Kirpal Singh And Anr on 19 April, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
2024:PHHC:052949
234
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-4922-2008 (O&M)
Date of decision : 19.04.2024
Charan Kaur ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Kirpal Singh & Anr. ...Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Tushar Verma, Advocate for
Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
Service of respondent No.1 dispensed with
vide order dated 18.08.2009.
Mr. Rahul Pathania, Advocate for respondent No.2.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellant
aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Patiala vide award dated 24.05.2008.
2. Since the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by
the Tribunal, are not in dispute, the same are not being reproduced herein for
the sake of brevity.
3. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant has not laid any
challenge to the income of the deceased as well as to the deduction as
applied by the Tribunal. However, the learned counsel would contend that
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:052949
FAO-4922-2008 (O&M) -2-
no addition has been made towards future prospects which ought to have
been 10% and further that multiplier of '6' has wrongly been applied by the
Tribunal, whereas it ought to have been '9' keeping in view the age of the
deceased being 60 years at the time of the accident. It is further the
contention of the learned counsel that the amounts awarded under the
conventional heads as well as under the head 'loss of consortium' are also
not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It
is further the contention of the learned counsel that even the interest is on the
lower side. In support of his contentions he has relied upon the judgments of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sarla Verma & Ors. vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr. [(2009) 6 SCC 121], National Insurance
Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680], Magma
General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram
& Ors. [(2018) 18 SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam
M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021(4) RCR (Civil) 642].
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance
Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount has already been
awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of
any enhancement.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. In the present case, the Tribunal had awarded the following
compensation :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.3,000/-
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:052949
FAO-4922-2008 (O&M) -3-
2 Annual Income [Rs.3,000x12]=Rs.36,000/-
3 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.36,000-12,000]=Rs.24,000/-
4 Multiplier - 6 [Rs.24,000x6]=Rs.1,44,000/-
5 Funeral expenses Rs.6,000/-
6 Loss of consortium Rs.10,000/-
7 Total Compensation Rs.1,60,000/-
Interest 6%
7. In the present case, since no challenge has been laid to the
income of the deceased as well as to the deduction, hence, the income of the
deceased is maintained as Rs.3,000/- per month as also the 1/3rd deduction.
No addition has been made towards future prospects and hence as per the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi
(supra), 10% addition is made towards future prospects keeping in view the
age of the deceased being 60 years. Multiplier of '6' has wrongly been
applied and hence, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), a multiplier of '9' ought to have been
applied. Further, the amounts awarded under the conventional heads and
under the head 'loss of consortium' are not as per the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), Magma
General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and N. Jayasree (supra) and
hence, the claimant-appellant would be entitled to Rs.18,000/-
(Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/-
(Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses and the claimant-
appellant i.e. wife of the deceased would also be entitled to Rs.48,000/-
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:052949
FAO-4922-2008 (O&M) -4-
(Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of consortium. Further, interest @
6% per annum as awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and hence the
same is enhanced to 7.5% per annum. Accordingly, the reworked
compensation is as under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.3,000/-
2 Annual Income [Rs.3,000x12]=Rs.36,000/-
3 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.36,000-12,000]=Rs.24,000/-
4 Future Prospects - 10% [Rs.24,000+2,400]=Rs.26,400/-
5 Multiplier - 9 [Rs.26,400x9]=Rs.2,37,600/-
6 Loss of estate Rs.18,000/-
7 Funeral expenses Rs.18,000/-
8 Loss of consortium
(i) Spousal's Rs.48,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.3,21,600/-
8. The amount awarded by the Tribunal as well as in excess of and
over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal shall also attract interest
@ 7.5 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the
realization of the entire amount.
9. In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed
and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Pending
applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
19.04.2024 ( ALKA SARIN )
Yogesh Sharma JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment.
