FAO NO.6342 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO NO.6342 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.10.2011 Smt.Lali Devi and others ....Appellants Versus Surender Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: None for the appellants Mr.Sushil Gautam, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.TK Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Company ***** Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral) CM No. 27892 CII of 2010 Despite notice, reply has not been filed as yet. For the reasons enumerated in the application, delay of 99 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned. Application stands disposed of accordingly. FAO No. 6342 of 2010 The present appeal has been preferred by the claimants/appellants, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Panipat vide award dated 23.1.2010, on account of death of Jodh Raj, son of the appellants/claimants. FAO NO.6342 of 2010 (O&M) 2 Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.1,59,000/- on account of death of Jodh Raj son of the appellants, which is a meager amount, the learned Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 5, whereas it should have been 11 as per Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77 as the age of the deceased at the time of his death was 54 years as per the voter card. Further the learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted the income of the deceased as 1/3rd, whereas there are 9 dependents and therefore, as per Sarla Verma's case (supra), it should have been 1/5th deduction. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents- has opposed the prayer of the appellants and stated that the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation and there is no scope for enhancement. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully. From the perusal of the impugned Award, it is made out that the deceased, Jodh Ram was 54 years of age reflected in his Voter Card at the time of his death. He left behind his wife and seven children (six minor and 1 adult). The learned Tribunal deducted 1/3rd income of the deceased towards his personal expenses and applied a multiplier of 5 and thus arrived at the compensation of ` 1,44,000/-. According to the norms laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma's case (supra), deduction should have been made to the extent of 1/5th as there are 9 dependents and by taking into consideration FAO NO.6342 of 2010 (O&M) 3 the age of the deceased i.e. 54 years, the multiplier of 11 should have also been applied. I order accordingly. As such, the total compensation after calculation comes to ` 3,80,160/- (3600x 1/5 x 2880x12x11). The learned Tribunal awarded `10,000/- towards funeral expenses and ` 5000/- towards loss of consortium, which seems to be just and adequate. The enhanced amount i.e. `2,36,160/- (3,80,160-1,44,000) shall be paid to the claimants in the manner indicated in the impugned Award within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. If the amount is not deposited within the stipulated period, the appellant shall be entitled to get interest 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the instant appeal till its realisation. In view of the above, the present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award is modified to the extent indicated above. 12.10.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE