Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harjit Kaur vs Surinder Pal And Ors on 2 July, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
243
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-5331-2014 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 02.07.2024
Harjit Kaur ... Appellant(s)
Versus
Surinder Pal & Ors ... Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the appellant.
None for respondent Nos.1 and 3.
Respondent No.2 proceeded against ex parte
vide order dated 17.09.2018.
Mr. S.P. Soi, Advocate for respondent No.4.
Mr. Manjit Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.5.
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, Jalandhar vide award dated 26.03.2014.
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 i.e. Rs.1,28,445/- per annum and
deduction of 1/3rd. The learned counsel has contended that multiplier of '14'
has wrongly been applied by the Tribunal whereas it ought to have been '16'
keeping in view the age of the deceased being 31 years at the time of the
integrity of this order/judgment.
accident. It is further the contention of the learned counsel that no addition
has been made towards future prospects which ought to have been 40% and
that the amount awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the
head 'loss of consortium' is also not in accordance with the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 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. None has put in appearance on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and
3 despite service. Respondent No.2 was proceeded against ex parte.
Admittedly in the impugned award no liability has been fastened upon
respondent Nos.4 and 5.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the claimant-appellant.
6. In the present case the Tribunal had awarded the following
compensation :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Annual Income Rs.1,28,445/-
2 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.1,28,445 - 42,815]=Rs.85,630/-
3 Multiplier - 14 [Rs.85,630x14]=Rs.11,98,820/-
4 Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
5 Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/-
6 Total compensation Rs.13,23,820/-
Interest 7.5%
integrity of this order/judgment.
7. In the present case since no challenge has been laid to the
income of the deceased i.e. Rs.1,28,445/- per annum as well as to the
deduction of 1/3rd, the same are maintained. The Tribunal has wrongly
applied a multiplier of '14', whereas it ought to have been '16' as the
deceased was 31 years of age at the time of the accident and hence as per the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma
(supra), multiplier of '16' would be applicable. Further, 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), 40% addition is
made towards future prospects. The amount awarded under the conventional
heads and under the head 'loss of consortium' is 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 would also be entitled to Rs.48,000/- (Rs.40,000+20% increase)
towards loss of consortium. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as
under :
Sr. Heads Compensation Awarded
No.
1 Annual Income Rs.1,28,445/-
2 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.1,28,445-42,815]=Rs.85,630/-
3 Future Prospects - 40% [Rs.85,630+34,252]=Rs.1,19,882/-
4 Multiplier - 16 [Rs.1,19,882x16]=Rs.19,18,112/-
5 Loss of estate Rs.18,000/-
6 Funeral expenses Rs.18,000/-
7 Loss of consortium
(i) Filial Rs.48,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.20,02,112/-
integrity of this order/judgment.
8. The amount 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.
02.07.2024 ( ALKA SARIN )
Yogesh Sharma JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment.
