Punjab-Haryana High Court
(O&M) Neeru Bala & Others vs Suraj Bhan & Others on 13 March, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
FAO No.5232 of 2011 1 2024:PHHC:036368
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
595 FAO No.5232 of 2011
Date of Decision : 13.03.2024
Neeru Bala and Others ....Appellants
VERSUS
Suraj Bhan and Others ....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Madan Gupta, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Rohit Kataria, Advocate for
Ms. Anamika Mehra, Advocate for respondent No.3.
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-
appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Kaithal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal')
vide award dated 29.09.2010.
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. The Tribunal awarded the following compensation :
Sr.No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly income Rs.4,500/-
2 Annual income [Rs.4,500 x 12] = Rs.54,000/-
3 Amount after applying [Rs.54,000 - 18,000] = Rs.36,000/-
deduction 1/3rd
4 Multiplier of 12 [Rs.36,000 x 12] = Rs.4,32,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.4,52,000/-
Interest 7.5% per annum
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.5232 of 2011 2 2024:PHHC:036368
3. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that
though the income of the deceased was rightly assessed as Rs.4,500/- per
month and a deduction of 1/3rd was applied correctly, however, the Tribunal
has wrongly applied a multiplier of 12, which ought to have been 18 keeping
in view the age of the deceased, who was 24 years of age at the time of
accident. It is further the contention that no addition has been made towards
loss of 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 as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. In support of his contentions the learned counsel for the appellants
has relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of
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.3 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 has though rightly assessed the
income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month and also correctly applied a
deduction of 1/3rd, however, a multiplier of 12 has wrongly been applied in
the present case. The deceased in the present case was 24 years of age at the
time of accident and hence, a multiplier of 18 would be applicable. The
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.5232 of 2011 3 2024:PHHC:036368
Tribunal has not made any addition towards loss of 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 loss of future
prospects. Further, 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-appellants 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-
appellants (wife and parents of the deceased) would also be entitled to
Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of consortium.
7. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.4,500/-
2 Annual Income [Rs.4,500 x 12] = Rs.54,000/-
3 Deduction 1/3rd [Rs.54,000 - 18,000] = Rs.36,000/-
4 Future Prospects - 40% [Rs.36,000 + 14,400] = Rs.50,400/-
5 Multiplier - 18 [Rs.50,400 x 18] = Rs.9,07,200/-
6 Loss of estate Rs.18,000/-
7 Funeral expenses Rs.18,000/-
8 Loss of consortium
(i) Filial [Rs.48,000x2] = Rs.96,000/-
(ii) Spousal Rs.48,000/-
Total Rs.1,44,000/-
Total Rs.10,87,200/-
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 realization of the entire amount.
integrity of this order/judgment
FAO No.5232 of 2011 4 2024:PHHC:036368
The amount shall be apportioned between the claimant-appellants as directed
by the Tribunal.
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.
( ALKA SARIN )
13.03.2024 JUDGE
jk
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment
