FAO No. 2867 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 2867 of 2009 Date of decision: 29.04.2010 Smt. Birmati and another ....Appellants Versus Mehrabna and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. Anshumaan Dalal, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. VINOD K. SHARMA, J.(ORAL) This appeal, by the claimant/appellants, is directed against the award dated 7.2.2009, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak, allowing the claim petition filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The pleaded case of the claimant/appellants was, that on 7.4.2007, Rupesh along with Rajbir S/o Bal Kishan was going from Rithal Phogat to Dehradoon on a truck bearing registration No.HR- 55D/2187, which was driven by Rajbir and the deceased was conductor on that truck. When they reached near Muzafar Nagar road Shamli, there were three road points and they wrongly proceeded on wrong way. On coming to know about the wrong road they stopped their truck. The deceased came out of the truck for helping the driver to reverse the vehicle. In the meantime, an Eicher Canter bearing registration No.HR- 45/9825 came from Shamli side, which was driven by the driver in zig- FAO No. 2867 of 2009 -2- zag manner at a high speed and hit the deceased, due to which he fell down on the road and sustained multiple injuries. He succumbed to his injuries on 8.4.2005. FIR qua this accident was registered on 8.4.2007, under Sections 279, 337 & 304-A IPC. The deceased was 20 years old and was said to be earning Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) plus Rs.50/- (Rupees fifty only) per day as diet money. It was also claimed, that a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) was spent on his treatment. In reply, respondents No.1 and 2 took a stand, that a false criminal case was got registered against driver in collusion with other vehicle i.e. HR-55D/2189. Stand was taken, that the accident in question occurred due to the wrong turning of truck No. HR-55D/2189 without observing the position of the road. Stand was, that in spite of the best efforts, collusion could not be avoided. Other averments were also denied. Insurance Company, on the other hand, took a plea, that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. On merits, negligence on the part of respondent No.1 was denied. It was also denied, that deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) per month along with Rs.50/- (Rupees fifty only) as diet money. The learned Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence, recorded a finding, that Rupesh deceased died in motor vehicular accident on 7.4.2007 in the area of Muzafar Nagar due to the rash and negligent driving of Eicher Canter bearing registration No. HR-45-9825 by its driver respondent No.1. On account of failure the prove the income of FAO No. 2867 of 2009 -3- the deceased by the claimants, the income of the deceased was assessed at Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) per month and multiplier of 16 was applied in view of the fact the deceased was unmarried and 20 years of age. On account of failure on the part of the claimants to prove the expenses incurred on treatment, the learned Tribunal granted only a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards medical expenses, last rites and transportation of the dead body. The learned counsel for the appellants has challenged the award on the plea that the compensation awarded was less as the income of the deceased was wrongly taken to be Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) per month and furthermore that the multiplier applied was not correct, in view the age of the deceased. The learned counsel for the appellants also contends, that the dependency has been wrongly assessed as 50%, though it should have been 2/3rd. On notice, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has appeared. At the time of arguments, it was agreed between the parties, that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and in particular, that no compensation for the loss of estate was granted, an increase of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousand only) be allowed to the appellants. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is disposed off, by enhancing the compensation by Rs.12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousand only). The compensation payable shall now be Rs.3,10,000/- (Rupees three lac and ten thousand only). Enhanced compensation be paid within a period of one month FAO No. 2867 of 2009 -4- from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. In case, the payment is not made within the stipulated period, the claimants shall be entitled to interest @ 12% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of claim petition till realisation. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge April 29, 2010 R.S.