FAO No.4603 of 2008 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4603 of 2008 (O&M) Decided on : July 07, 2009 Jasminder Kaur and others ... Appellants VERSUS Yadav Goel and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sanjeev Pandit, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr.Subhash Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.3. A.N.JINDAL, J.- This appeal for enhancement of compensation has arisen out of the award dated 21.12.2007 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar. Sukhwinder Singh died of the injuries suffered in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 7.3.2007, on account of the rash and negligent act of respondent No.1, who while driving Hyundai Accent Car bearing No.PB-10-BN-2070 struck the motor cycle of the deceased from the back side and caused him injuries. The Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs.8,50,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum. The main grievance of the appellants is that the Tribunal fell into an error while applying the multiplier of 14 as the age of the deceased was 32 years at the time of accident and he was to support six persons, out of whom three are the minor children. It was also contended that as per IInd Schedule appended to FAO No.4603 of 2008 (O&M) [ 2 ] Motor Vehicles Act, multiplier of 16 ought to have been applied in such circumstances. Counsel for the respondent has refuted the argument while urging that the cut as well as the multiplier were rightly applied keeping in view the age, income, dependancy and expectancy of life. Sukhwinder Singh died in the prime of his life after leaving his wife, three school going children, his aged mother and grand-mother, who were also to be maintained by him. He was a transporter, running his business in the name of `Jeet Transport' and paying income-tax also, receipts of which are placed on record as Ex.P1 to P3. Expectancy of life in this country is more than 70 years. Though, the loss of such an energetic young man cannot be compensated in terms of money, yet the Legislature has enacted the law to support the helpless, destitute and poor dependents, who are rendered helpless on occurring of an unfortunate event. Therefore, the Tribunal fell in error while applying multiplier of 14, whereas, appropriate multiplier of 17 should have been applied in this case. Accordingly, the appeal is partly accepted and the impugned award is modified to the extent that the claimants/appellants are held entitled to compensation of Rs.10,20,000/-. The other terms of the impugned award shall remain intact. ( A.N.JINDAL ) JUDGE July 07, 2009 `gian'