Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shiva Nand Sharma Etc vs St Of Hry Etc on 25 October, 2024

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290



FAO-3947-2005 (O&M)                      -1-


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH
205
                                                          FAO-3947-2005 (O&M)
                                                          Decided on : 25.10.2024

Shiva Nand Sharma and others                                     . . . Appellant(s)
                                        Versus
State of Haryana and others                                    . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

PRESENT: Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
         for the appellant(s).

            Mr. Apoorv Garg, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

            Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for
            Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate
            for respondent No.3 - Insurance Company.
                                   ****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants

(hereinafter referred as 'claimants') in MACT Case No. 197 of 2003, for

modification of award dated 14.06.005, passed by Ld. Motor Accidents

Claims Tribunal, Hisar (hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. Tribunal') by way of

enhancement of amount of compensation, on account of death of deceased

-'Satya Bhama Sharma'.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 07.07.2003, deceased

was travelling towards bus stand, Bhiwani to board a bus for going to

Hansi, with one Parveen Kumar on motorcycle bearing registration no.HR-

16C/8612 as Pillion rider. When they reached near police Chowki Sabzi

Mandi, Rohtak Road, a bus bearing registration no.HR-16-PA-0408, driven

by respondent no.2 came at a very high speed from the opposite direction

and hit the motorcycle. As a result of which, Satya Bhama (deceased) fell

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290

FAO-3947-2005 (O&M) -2-

down and sustained fatal injuries and ultimately succumbed to them.

Resultantly, case was registered at P.S Bhiwani.

3. Two sons of the deceased namely; Shiva and Uma (minor) and

Nija Nand (widower of the deceased), filed a claim petition under Section

166 of the motor vehicle Act, 1988 for seeking compensation on account of

death of Satya Bhama Sharma in the motor vehicular accident. However,

after going through the record, appreciating the evidences, examining the

witnesses and hearing the arguments of both the sides, Ld. Tribunal has

assessed Rs.24,000/-p.a. on account of loss of dependency, applied the

multiplier of 15, awarded Rs.2,500/- as funeral expenses and Rs.50,000/- as

loss of consortium and accordingly, awarded total compensation to the

claimant to the tune of Rs.4,12,500 /- payable by respondents severally and

jointly with interest @6% per annum, from the date of filing of the petition

till its realization.

4. Appellants/ Claimants have filed the present appeal, seeking

enhancement of the compensation over and above the amount awarded by

the Ld. Tribunal.

5. While addressing arguments, Counsel for the appellants submits

that the Ld. Tribunal has erred in holding that the children were not

dependent upon the deceased as she was the mother and children are only

dependent upon their father. Further, Tribunal has wrongly assessed the loss

of dependency of the deceased - Satya Bhama Sharma, as it failed to

appreciate that she was working as a teacher in Government High School

and was drawing monthly salary of Rs.10,738/- as per salary certificate;

failed to enhance the income on account of future prospects; and thus, did

not grant any compensation on account of loss of estate, and loss of

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290

FAO-3947-2005 (O&M) -3-

consortium etc.

6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No.3 -

Insurance Company, submits that the Ld. Tribunal has rightly determined the

monthly salary of the deceased and there is no need to interfere in the

amount of compensation awarded by the Ld. Tribunal. Thus, the present

appeal was liable to be dismissed.

7. I have gone through the impugned award and the calculations

mentioned therein, apart from hearing learned counsel for the parties. There

is no doubt that in a situation where the different Courts at different times

were at diversions in their opinion and in the absence of any clarification by

the law makers despite recommendations by the Hon'ble Apex Court, all the

major issues were referred to the larger Bench, and accordingly, Constitution

Bench was constituted in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay

Sethi and Others, 2017 (4) RCR (Civil) 1009: Law finder Doc ID #918174 .

Thus, for the purpose of reaching out to appropriate amount of compensation

for adjudging the rights of the claimants, guidelines laid down in the

judgment of the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi's case (supra), would

help the Courts.

8. In modern family structures, usually both spouses contribute

financially. Ignoring wife's income solely because the husband is also

earning, is against the concept of dual incomes in modern households. If

both the spouses are earning, there will be more amount available in

common pool. Even standard of living improves .Thus, income of the

deceased spouse, irrespective of the surviving spouse's earnings, should be

considered while assessing the loss of income for the purpose of calculating

the compensation payable to the claimants.


                               3 of 6

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290



FAO-3947-2005 (O&M)                     -4-

Moreover, it is shocking to notice that the tribunal assessed

Rs.2,000/-per month on account of loss to the family by way of services

which the deceased would have rendered , as deceased's husband hired a

male attendant at same monthly wage. Such comparison fails to consider the

personal, multifaceted and irreplaceable nature of the deceased's

contribution to the family, whereas, deceased's contribution extends beyond

mere monetary aspect.

9. It is not in dispute that as per Salary Certificate, deceased

namely, Satya Bhama Sharma was working as a Government teacher in

Government High School, and drawing a salary of Rs.10,738/-per month.

From the evidence on record, it stands established that the deceased was

aged about 39 years and as per Pranay Sethi's case (supra), addition of 50%,

on the count of 'future prospects' has to be made and total amount of

earnings comes to be Rs.10,738/- + Rs.5,369/- (50% of Rs.10,738 /-) =

Rs.16,107 /- per month. Hence, keeping in view the number of dependents

i.e. husband and their two children 1/3rd is to be deducted on account of

'personal expenses', which is to the extent of Rs.5,369 /- and the residue

amount works out to be Rs.10,738 /- per month and annual comes to be

Rs.1,28,856 /-.Considering the age of the deceased as per Smt. Sarla Verma

& Ors. Vs Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, the

appropriate multiplier to be applied in the present case is '15' and after, so

applying this multiplier, the loss of dependency comes to be Rs. Rs.1,28,856

/-X 15 = Rs.19,32,840/-

10. Rest of the parameters are assessed and calculated in

accordance with the judgment of this Court titled as Sangtari Muleem v.

Karnail Singh, (FAO No. 2538 of 2006, D/d. 07.07.2023) : Law Finder Doc

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290

FAO-3947-2005 (O&M) -5-

Id # 2270482, which is in consonance with the settled proposition of law laid

down by the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case (supra), and Smt. Sarla

Verma's case (supra) and Smt. Anjali and others v. Lokendra Rathod and

others, 2023 (1) R.C.R. (Civil) 229 : Law Finder Doc Id #2081014.

11. Claimants are entitled for Rs. 25,000/- as compensation under

the head of funeral expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of estate. Loss of

consortium is to be awarded to the tune of Rs.48,400/- each to the all of the

claimants in the instant appeal.

12. For the sake of convenience, amount of compensation assessed

and calculated by this Court is produced below in a tabular form:

               Sr.   Heads                     Compensation awarded
               No.                             by the High Court
               1.    Income                    Rs.10,738/-
               2.    Future Prospects          50%
               3.    Deduction       towards 1/3rd
                     personal expenses
               4.    Total Annual Income       Rs.1,28,856 /-

               6.    Loss of Dependency        Rs.10,27,728/-
               7.    Funeral Expenses          Rs.25,000/-
               8.    Loss of Estate            Rs.20,000/-
               9.    Loss     of     Spousal Rs. 48,400 /-
                     Consortium
               10.   Loss     of     Parental Rs.96,800 /-(Rs. 48,400
                     Consortium                X 2)
               11.   Loss       of      filial nil
                     Consortium
               12.   Total Compensation to Rs.21,23,040/-
                     be Paid

Thus, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation amount

of Rs.21,23,000/- (rounded-off) as against Rs.4,12,500 /-.

13. Thus, keeping in view the aims and object of the beneficial

legislation of providing relief to the victims or their families, the total

compensation payable to the appellants (petitioners/claimants) is enhanced

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:142290

FAO-3947-2005 (O&M) -6-

to Rs.21,23,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lacs and Twenty Three Thousand

only).

14. The awarded compensation shall be paid to the claimants within

a period of three months from the date of this order, along with interest at