FAO No.630 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No.630 of 2002 Date of decision:09.12.2008 Madan Lal ......Appellant Versus Jagjot Singh Swami and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Ms.Ekta Thakur, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Shireesh Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.Raj Kumar Bishambu, Advocate, for New India Insurance Company. **** JUDGMENT SABINA, J. This is an appeal against the award dated 11.9.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). The case of the claimant, as stated in the claim petition, in brief, is that on 12.12.1995, at about 1.15 p.m., Des Raj, brother of the claimant was going on the left side of the road on Madhya Marg, Sector 8, Chandigarh. When he reached near C.T.U.Bus Stop, FAO No.630 of 2002 2 respondent No.1 came in a Maruti Car No.DL 3CE 6086 driving the same in a rash and negligent manner and struck against Des Raj. As a result of this Des Raj suffered injuries and he was rushed to General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh. Thereafter, he was shifted to PGI, Chandigarh, wherein he died on 14.12.1995. Des Raj (deceased) was un-married and issueless. His mother had pre- deceased him. The claimant claimed that he was the only legal heir of the deceased Des Raj and, hence, filed the claim petition claiming compensation on account of death of his brother Des Raj in the road side accident. Notice of the claim petition was issued to the respondents and they filed their written statements. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:- “1. Whether respondent No.1 by driving Car No.DL3CE- 6086 rashly and negligently caused the accident on 12.12.1995 resulting into death of Des Raj? OPP 2. To what amount of compensation, the claimant is entitled, if so, from whom? OPP 3. Whether respondent No.1 was not possessing a valid driving licence at the time of accident? OPR. 4. Relief. Parties led their evidence in support of their case. Learned Tribunal, vide the impugned award, allowed a sum of Rs.1,17,600/- to the claimant as compensation. The claimant has FAO No.630 of 2002 3 filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation amount. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. The appellant is the brother of deceased Des Raj, who was aged 60 years. Learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.2,100/- per month and after applying a cut of one third of the income for personal expenses of the deceased, calculated the monthly dependency of the appellant as Rs.1,400/- per month. In view of the age of the deceased, a multiplier of '7' was applied. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the amount of compensation calculated by the learned Tribunal cannot be said to be on the lower side and, as such, the impugned award calls for no interference. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (SABINA) JUDGE December 09, 2008 anita