FAO No.2533 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2533 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision 16.11.2009 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited ...... Appellant VERSUS Darshan Singh and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.D.P.Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Jashanpreet Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1(claimant). ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): The appellant-Oriental Insurance Company (herein referred as 'the appellant') has assailed the impugned award dated 23.05.2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar (herein referred as 'the Tribunal'), awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.3,11,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum in favour of the claimant-respondent No.1 (herein referred as 'the claimant') on account of the death of Kirpal Singh aged about 24 years in a motor vehicular accident. Arguments raised by the appellant is two fold. First is that appropriate multiplier has not been applied keeping in view the age of the deceased's father, secondly the Tribunal should not have awarded penal interest observing that the respondents would pay interest @ 6% per annum and if they fail to pay the compensation within two months then the interest to be paid by the respondents would be 9% per annum. Having perused the record of the case, it transpires that no fault could be found in the findings returned by the Tribunal regarding the quantum of compensation. The Tribunal had assessed the monthly income of the deceased the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month, treating the deceased at FAO No.2533 of 2007 2 par with a casual labourer. Even otherwise, the deceased was a 24 years old young man at the very threshold of his life, having a good prospective career. He was a sole protective umbrella of his old father. The agony of the father could not be measured as while putting in the situation of such old father whose young son had died, his life would be converted into ruins. Kirpal Singh was 24 years old and was likely to be married. It may further be observed that with the increase in age, the dependency of the appellant should have also been increased. Anyway, the deceased would not spend more than 1/3rd upon himself out of his income. Everything saved by him would also be diverted towards the claimant as his pecuniary loss. Thus, keeping in view the age of claimant and also all the facts and circumstances of the case, the multiplier applied by the Tribunal could not be said to be inappropriate or unreasonable. As regards the interest, the Tribunal appears to have fallen in error while awarding penal interest. Though, the Tribunal would have been at his discretion to award interest at reasonable rate but awarding of penal interest has been discouraged. I find support to my this view from the judgment delivered in case National Insurance Company Limited versus Keshav Bahadur and others 2004 ACJ 648. As such, this argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is liable to be accepted. Resultantly, I partly accept this appeal while refusing to entertain the argument regarding deduction of compensation. The claimant would be entitled to only interest only @ 6% per annum till realization of the award amount. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 16.11.2009 mamta-II