Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jyoti Devi And Ors vs Krishan Kumar And Ors on 18 March, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
2024:PHHC:038537
171
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-349-2013 (O&M)
Date of decision : 18.03.2024
Jyoti Devi and Ors. ... Appellant(s)
Versus
Krishan Kumar and Anr. ... Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Ms. Ravinder Kaur Manaise, Advocate (Amicus Curiae)
for the appellants.
Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for
Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
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, Narnaul vide award dated 03.10.2012.
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 in the present case had awarded the following
compensation :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.6,000/-
2 Annual Income [Rs.6,000x12] = Rs.72,000/-
3 Deduction 50% [Rs.72,000-36,000] = Rs.36,000/-
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:038537
FAO-349-2013 (O&M) -2-
4 Multiplier - 14 [Rs.36,000x14] = Rs.5,04,000/-
5 Funeral expenses Rs.10,000/-
6 Loss of love and affection Rs.10,000/-
8 Total Compensation Rs.5,24,000/-
Interest 7.5%
4. Learned amicus curiae appearing for the claimant-appellants
would contend that the deceased was aged 18 years at the time of the
accident. It is further the contention that though the income of the deceased
was rightly assessed as Rs.6,000/- per month and 50% deduction was
applied correctly, however, multiplier '14' has wrongly been applied by the
Tribunal, whereas it ought to have been '18' keeping in view the age of the
deceased. Learned amicus curiae would further contend that no amount has
been awarded towards future prospects which ought to have been 40% and
further that the amount awarded under the conventional heads as well as
towards consortium is also on the lower side. In support of her contentions
she 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].
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance
Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount has already been
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:038537
FAO-349-2013 (O&M) -3-
awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of
any enhancement.
6. In the present case the Tribunal has though rightly assessed the
income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month and also correctly applied
deduction to the extent of 50%, however, multiplier '14' 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), multiplier '18' would be applicable
keeping in view the age of the deceased being 18 years at the time of the
accident. 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.
Further, the amount awarded under the conventional heads and towards
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 (parents and two brothers of the deceased)
would also be entitled to Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase)
towards filial consortium. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as
under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.6,000/-
integrity of this order/judgment.
2024:PHHC:038537
FAO-349-2013 (O&M) -4-
2 Annual Income [Rs.6,000x12] = Rs.72,000/-
3 Deduction 50% [Rs.72,000-36,000] = Rs.36,000/-
4 Future Prospects - 40% [Rs.36,000+14,400] = Rs.50,400/-
5 Multiplier - 18 [Rs.50,400x18] = Rs.9,07,200/-
6 Loss of estate Rs.18,000/-
7 Funeral expenses Rs.18,000/-
8 Loss of consortium
(i) Filial [Rs.48,000/-x4] = Rs.1,92,000/-
Total Compensation Rs.11,35,200/-
7. 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.
The amount shall be apportioned between the claimants as directed by the
Tribunal. Two brothers of the deceased would be entitled to Filial
consortium i.e. Rs.48,000/- each.
8. 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.
18.03.2024 ( ALKA SARIN )
Yogesh Sharma JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment.
