FAO No.1366 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1366 of 2007 (in MACT No.160 of 2003) Date of Decision : 22.11.2011 Rama Kumari and others .......Appellants Versus Harjinder Singh and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Mehardeep Singh DAG, Punjab. **** JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL) The appellant-claimants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation awarded vide impugned Award dated 01.12.2006, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar (for short, ‘the learned Tribunal’). Briefly stated, the facts of the case in hand are that on 6.09.2003 at about 11.00 p.m., the deceased, Satish Kumar, was coming from Chandigarh on his scooter. When he reached near Daon , he stopped there because a motorcycle bearing No.PB-12F- 2429, was lying in the middle of the road and some persons including 1 FAO No.1366 of 2007 two police personnel were standing at the spot. He parked his scooter on kacha side of the road and on the asking of the police personnel, he started removing the said motorcycle towards the kacha side of the road. In the meantime, Ambulance bearing No.PB-12C-1876, being driven by the driver, Harjinder Singh, rashly, negligently and at a high speed, came from Chandigarh side and struck against three persons who were removing the said motorcycle. Two persons, including the deceased, Satish Kumar, died at the spot, whereas the third person, Avtar Singh, died in Civil Hospital, Kharar. FIR No.224 dated 7.09.2003 under Sections 279/337/338/304-A/427 IPC was registered at Police Station Kharar. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The deceased, Satish Kumar, was 36 years of age at the time of his death in the accident. The claimants are his wife, two minor daughters, and mother. As per the salary certificate, Ex.PW- 1A, the deceased was drawing a salary of `7,000/- per month. It has come on record that the deceased was a Punjab Government Employee and less than 40 years of age, therefore, learned Tribunal ought to have added 50% more to his monthly salary on account of future prospects. In this view of the matter, the gross salary of the deceased is taken to be `10,500/- per month. The learned Tribunal further erred in deducting 1/3rd of his monthly income on account of his monthly expenses as the number of claimants in the instant case is four. As per the law laid down by 2 FAO No.1366 of 2007 Hon’ble the Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, the deduction on account of personal expenses ought to have been assessed to the extent of 1/4th. It is ordered accordingly. However, in view of the age of the deceased and the schedule provided in Sarla Verma’s case (supra), the multiplier of 16 applied by the learned Tribunal is on the higher side. Therefore, the multiplier of 16 is decreased to 15. In view of the discussion made above, the amount of compensation on account of dependency comes to `14,17,500/- [(10,500/- X ¾ X 12 X 15] and the claimants-appellants are held entitled to an enhanced amount of compensation of `5,21,500/-. The learned Tribunal has granted an amount of `5,000/- against the head ‘consortium’ and `2,000/- as ‘funeral charges’, which appear to be inadequate. This Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be sufficiently met in case another amount of `5,000/- is granted towards the head ‘consortium’ and the amount granted against ‘funeral charges’ is enhanced from `2,000/- to `10,000/-. It is ordered accordingly. In view of the above, the claimants-appellants are held entitled to the enhanced compensation of `5,34,500/-, which shall be payable to them within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. In case the amount aforesaid is not paid within the stipulated period, the same shall carry interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the present appeal, till its realization. 3 FAO No.1366 of 2007 The present appeal is partly allowed and the Award of the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) 22.11.2011 JUDGE atulsethi Note: Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No 4