FAO No. 849 of 1990 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No. 849 of 1990 (O&M) Date of decision : 10.5.2010 Naresh Kumar and others ... Appellants vs Balram and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. A. Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded to them by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon (hereinafter to be referred as “the Tribunal”). Briefly the facts as mentioned in the award of the learned Tribunal are that few ladies employed in the schools at Pataudi and Bhora Kalan had engaged a Matador bearing registration no. DED-5936, owned by Raj Singh, on monthly basis for transportation from Gurgaon to their schools. On 27.12.1988 at about 7.00 a.m., when they were going to their schools and reached near village Jhund Sarai, at about 7.30 a.m., a Haryana Roadways Bus bearing registration no. HRU-2742, driven by respondent no. 1 Balram, came at a very fast speed without blowing any horn and struck against the matador. Due to this impact, Satwant Khera, Saroj Bakshi, Sunita, Raj Rani, Vidyawati, Nirmal Vohra, Kamlesh, Saroj Bala and Raj Singh driver of the matador, died at the spot, while Satwanti, Santosh, Sunita, Sarla, Neelam and Jaswant Pandey received injuries. They all were shifted to the hospital. The post-mortem of the deceased were conducted and medical aid was given to the injureds. FIR, Ex. PA, was registered. The appellants and other claimants filed claim petitions which were allowed by the learned Tribunal vide common award dated 23.4.1990. Dissatisfied with the award, the appellants being dependents of deceased Kamlesh Kumari are before this court. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that deceased Kamlesh Kumari, aged 30 years, was employed as JBT Teacher in Bhora Kalan High School in the scale of Rs. 1200-2400. Her last pay drawn was Rs. 1,600/- per month vide Ex. PW18/B. She left behind, her husband, and two minor children. It FAO No. 849 of 1990 -2- was also submitted that dependency assessed at Rs. 650/- per month and application of multiplier 16 by the Tribunal is not justified. As due to the death of Kamlesh Kumari, the life of the appellants got disturbed. To support his contention, he relied upon judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 (6) SCC 121. The second submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that compensation of Rs. 2,000/- granted by the learned Tribunal on account of funeral expenses is not adequate. The prayer is for further enhancement of compensation on that account also. While not disputing the proposition of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case, learned counsel for the State submitted that application of multiplier and assessment of dependency is correct, which does not call for any interference. He further submitted that as the deceased was a government employee, she was compensated by the government on account of death-cum-gratuity, etc. and no further enhancement is called for. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. The aforesaid tragedy is not denied by the learned State counsel. He could not dispute the fact that at the time of death, the children of the deceased were minor. They had lost their mother in their childhood. The deceased was not only employed as teacher but was also looking after her family. After her death, the life and status of the family got disturbed which cannot be restored with the money. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma's case (supra) laid down certain guide-lines for the purpose of calculation of compensation. The relevant paragraphs thereof are extracted below: “30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in U.P. SRTC v. Trilok Chandra, (1996) 4 SCC 362, the general practice is to apply standardised deductions. Having considered several subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one- third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceeds six.” The last pay drawn by the deceased was Rs. 1,600/- per month, is not disputed by the respondent. The deceased was 30 years of age at the time of FAO No. 849 of 1990 -3- accident. The learned Tribunal assessed Rs. 650/- per month as dependency which is not as per judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case. The learned Tribunal should have applied 1/3rd cut on income on account of personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly after applying cut of 1/3rd, the annual dependency comes to Rs. 12,800/-, and considering the age of the deceased at the time of death multiplier of 18 needs to be applied instead of 16, as applied by the learned Tribunal. After applying cut of 1/3rd on account of personal expenses of the deceased and multiplier of 18, the amount of compensation comes out to Rs. 2,30,400/-. To this adding Rs. 2,000/- on account of funeral expenses as granted by the learned Tribunal, total amount of compensation comes out to Rs. 2,32,400/-. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation. The enhanced compensation shall be shared by the children of the deceased only. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 10.5.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge