FAO No.935 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.935 of 2011 Date of Decision : 31.10.2011 Smt. Phool Pati and another .......Appellant Versus Bijender @ Billu and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: None for the appellants. None for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. **** JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL) The claimants have come in appeal against the Consolidated Award dated 30.08.2010, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak, disposing of eight claim petitions, on account of the death of Rakesh Nehra. Brief facts of the case in hand are that on 14.05.2009, the appellant, Rakesh Nehra, along with several other persons was travelling in Tata Sumo Jeep bearing No.HR-61-0720, being driven by one Rajesh son of Thambu Ram. When the aforesaid Jeep reached near the power-house in the area of Village Kharawar, a truck bearing 1 FAO No.935 of 2011 registration No.HR-63-0738, coming from Rohtak side, which was being driven by its driver, Bijender @ Billu, in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the Tata Sumo Jeep, after coming on the wrong side of the road. Resultantly, all the passengers of the Jeep sustained multiple and grievous injuries and they were removed to the PGIMS, Rohtak, for treatment. Four persons, including the deceased, Rakesh Nehra, succumbed to their injuries suffered by them due to the accident. The claimant-appellants, who are the mother and brother of the deceased, Rakesh Nehra, preferred MACT Petition No.203 of 2009, claiming the compensation to the tune of `30,00,000/- on account of the death of Rakesh Nehra, due to the accident. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, framing the issues and giving issue-wise findings, the learned Tribunal Awarded an amount of `4,36,000/- as compensation under different heads to appellant No.1, Phool Pati, while appellant No.2, Jitender Kumar, was not held entitled to claim any compensation. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of `4,32,000/- towards dependency. Another amount of `4,000/- has been awarded against the head ‘funeral charges’. Smt. Phool Pati, the 58 years’ old mother of the deceased, lost her young son in the accident. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head ‘love and affection’. In the opinion of this Court, ends of justice would be aptly met if an amount of `15,000/- is granted 2 FAO No.935 of 2011 towards ‘loss of love and affection’. I order accordingly. The compensation granted under the other heads seems just and reasonable. The appeal qua appellant No.1 is partly allowed and the Award of the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. The amount of enhanced compensation shall be payable within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the enhanced amount of compensation is not paid within the stipulated period, the appellant shall be entitled to the interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the present appeal, till its realization. As regards appellant No.2, Jitender Kumar, the brother of the deceased, it has specifically come on record that he is well- qualified having the degree of MCA. He is mentally fit and can walk. In these circumstances, appellant No.2 cannot be held to be dependent upon his deceased brother and the learned Tribunal has rightly disentitled him to claim any compensation. Accordingly, the appeal qua appellant No.2 is dismissed ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) 31.10.2011 JUDGE atulsethi Note: Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No 3