FAO No. 559 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 559 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.04.2010 Smt. Bhateri Devi and others ....Appellants Versus Kirpal Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: -Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the appellants. VINOD K. SHARMA, J.(ORAL) CM No.3048-CII of 2010 For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed, delay of 294 days in filing the appeal is condoned. FAO No.559 of 2010 This appeal, by the claimant/appellants, is directed against the award dated 19.8.2008, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat, vide which the claim petition filed by the claimant/appellants was allowed, and the appellants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.8,75,000/- (Rupees eight lac and seventy five thousand only) along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till final realisation. The claimant/appellants claimed compensation on account of death of Sh. Ved Parkash in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 12.8.2007. It was claimed, that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing registration No.RJ14GA 5336 being driven by respondent No.1. The claim petition was contested by alleging therein, that the alleged accident was not caused by respondent No.1 and the FAO No. 559 of 2010 (O&M) -2- respondents have been falsely implicated by the police. It was denied, that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of canter by respondent No.1. The stand was taken, that the accident had occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased. The Insurance Company, on the other hand, took a plea, that respondent No.1 did not have a legal and valid driving licence. Furthermore, that the claim petition filed was bogus and false. The learned Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence recorded a finding, that Ved Parkash lost his life due to the injuries sustained by him in motor vehicular accident on 12.8.2007 at about 8.30 p.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of canter bearing registration No.RJ 14GA 5336 by respondent No.1. Though, it was claimed by the claimants, that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.7,000/- (Rupees seven thousand only) per month, however, they were able to prove the income of Rs.6,700/- (Rupees six thousand and seven hundred only) per month, which was assessed to be income of the deceased, and thereafter by imposing a cut of 1/3rd for personal expenses, dependency of the claimants was assessed at 2/3rd. Keeping in view the age of the deceased i.e 36 years, the learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 16. Claimants were also awarded Rs.11,000/- (Rupees eleven thousand only) towards cremation charges, transportation charges and loss of estate. The total compensation payable was, therefore, assessed at Rs.8,75,000/- (Rupees eight lac and seventy five thousand only) along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, as referred to above. The learned counsel for the appellants has challenged the quantum of compensation on the plea, that the learned Tribunal did not take into consideration the future prospects of the deceased. In addition, the learned counsel for the appellants also contends, that FAO No. 559 of 2010 (O&M) -3- dependency of 2/3rd has been wrongly assessed as it should have been 1/4th. On consideration, I find no force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellants. Dependency of 2/3rd cannot be said to be on the lower side nor any ground is made out to interfere with the multiplier applied. The deceased was a conductor, therefore, there was no scope to take future prospects into consideration. The compensation awarded is as per settled law which does not call for any interference by this Court. No merit. Dismissed. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge April 29, 2010 R.S.