IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. F.A.O. No. 813 of 1990 Date of Decision: 10.12.2008 Reshma Devi and others. ....... Appellants through Shri R.A.Sheoran, Advocate. Versus Ram Avtar and others. ....... Respondent nos. 1 & 2 through Nemo. Respondent no.3 through Shri Neeraj Khanna, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? .... Mahesh Grover,J. This appeal by the claimants is directed against award dated 26.7.1990 passed by the motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for short, `the Tribunal') in M.A.C.T. Case No. 21 of 1989. Surat Singh, aged about 55-56 years, lost his life in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 16.11.1988. He was an ex- serviceman and after his release from the Army, he was employed as Pump Operator in Public Health Department. A claim petition was filed by the appellants for grant of compensation. The deceased was stated to be getting pension of Rs.400/- F.A.O.No.813 of 1990 -2- .... per month from the Army authorities and a salary of Rs.1250/- per month from the Public Health Department. Besides, he was stated to be earning Rs.2000/- per month from agriculture. The Tribunal, after appraising the evidence before it, held that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, i.e., fourwheeler bearing registration No.HNB-951, by its driver- Ram Avtar (respondent no.1). It further found that the deceased was getting pension of Rs.468/- per month from the Army and was drawing salary of Rs.1268/- from Public Health Department. However, the income from the agriculture was not accepted. Thus, the total income of the deceased was taken to be Rs.1736/- per month. A cut of 1/3rd was applied to this income on account of personal expenses of the deceased. The dependency was, in this way, assessed as Rs.1158/- per month, i.e., Rs.13896/- per annum. A multiplier of `2' was adopted and claimant nos. 1 & 4, i.e., widow and minor son, were allowed compensation of Rs.27792/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition. Feeling dis-satisfied with the award, the claimants are in appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. In my opinion, the impugned award deserves to be modified. Concededly, the deceased was working as a Pump Operator in the Public Works Department and was drawing salary of Rs.1268/- per month. Rest of the amount, i.e., the pension from the Army, ordinarily F.A.O.No.813 of 1990 -3- .... should not have been added for assessing the income of the deceased as the family was still getting the pension. Therefore, the income of the deceased is assessed as Rs.1268/- per month. Keeping in view the size of the family, 1/4th cut should have been applied to the income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses for the purposes of assessing the dependency. If done so, the dependency comes to Rs.951/-, which is rounded off to Rs.955/- per month, i.e., Rs.11460/- per annum. A multiplier of `8' deserves to be applied which is in accordance with the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 which is a guiding factor. In this manner, the compensation works out to Rs.91680/-. An additional sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded to the claimants for funeral expenses and loss of estate etc. Accordingly, the claimant nos. 1 and 4 are held entitled to receive a total compensation of Rs.1,11,680/-. The enhanced compensation shall be payable along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 shall be liable, jointly as well as severally, to pay the compensation and interest to the claimants. The impugned award is modified to the above extent and the appeal is allowed in the aforementioned terms. December 10,2008 ( Mahesh Grover ) “SCM” Judge