MAC .APP.No.595/2008 Page 1 of 4 41 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 595/2008 Date of Decision: 11th May, 2009 % SUNITA & ORS ..... Appellants Through : Mr. O.P. Mannie, Adv. versus SURESH KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. R.N. Sharma, Adv. for R-3. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES 3. Whether the judgment should be YES reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.3,65,000/- has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek the enhancement of the award amount. 2. The accident dated 10th March, 2007 resulted in the death of Praveen Chaudhary aged 23 years at the time of the accident. The deceased was survived by his mother aged 43 years, un-married sister aged 24 years and brother aged 18 years who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. MAC .APP.No.595/2008 Page 2 of 4 3. The learned Tribunal computed the compensation of Rs.3,65,000/-. The computation is based on the multiplier of 10 and 50% deduction towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged only two grounds at the hearing of this appeal. The first ground of challenge is that the multiplier of 14 should be applied according to the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129 decided on 15th April, 2009. 5. The second ground of challenge is that the personal expenses of the deceased should be deducted as 1/3rd instead of 1/2 since the mother of the deceased was a widow and was solely dependent on the deceased; the unmarried sister was dependent and the deceased had to arrange for her marriage, and the younger brother was also dependent upon the deceased. 6. With respect to the multiplier, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has rectified multipliers given in the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act and the multiplier according to the age of the mother of the deceased is 14. The multiplier is, therefore, enhanced from 10 to 14. 7. With respect to the personal expenses of the deceased, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Supra) has held that the deduction towards personal MAC .APP.No.595/2008 Page 3 of 4 expenses of the deceased should be 1/2 where the deceased was unmarried but where the family of the deceased bachelor is large and dependent upon the deceased, the deduction towards the personal expenses have to be restricted to 1/3rd. Following the aforesaid judgment, the appropriate deduction in the present case is 1/3rd instead of 1/2 applied by the learned Tribunal. The compensation in the present case is computed to be Rs.6,38,000/- (Rs.63,000 x 2/3 x 14 + Rs.40,000 + Rs.10,000). 8. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The award amount is enhanced from Rs.3,65,000/- to Rs.6,38,000/- along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment. 9. The enhanced amount along with interest be deposited by respondent No.3 with the learned Tribunal within 30 days. The shares of the appellants in the enhanced amount shall be as under:- Appellant No.1 : 80% Appellants No.2 and 3 : 10% each 10. Upon the enhanced amount along with interest being deposited, the learned Tribunal is directed to release 10% of the award amount along with interest to each of the appellants. The remaining 70% of the award amount be kept in fixed deposit in the name of appellant No.1 for a period of seven years on which periodical interest be paid to appellant No.1 but no loan, advance or withdrawal be permitted MAC .APP.No.595/2008 Page 4 of 4 without permission of the learned Tribunal. However, appellant No.1 is at liberty to approach the learned Tribunal for requirement of more amount at the time of marriage of appellant No.2. J.R. MIDHA, J MAY 11, 2009 aj