F.A.O.NO. 4302 OF 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cross Objection NO. 35-CII of 2010 & F.A.O.NO. 4302 OF 2009(O&M) Date of decision:22nd September, 2010 Punjab Road Transport Corporation, Sangrur Depot and another .......Appellant Versus Sita Rani and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Abinashi Singh, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J. 1. The Punjab Road Transport Corporation and the driver of the bus against whom the award was passed, who was found to be responsible for the accident, are the parties in appeal. Although, the appellant argued that there was no proof of negligence of the driver, I would uphold the finding by the only fact that the deceased was a cyclist and there had been a collision with the cyclist that resulted in his death. The proof of negligence is indeed light in such situations and therefore, I hold F.A.O.NO. 4302 OF 2009(O&M) 2 that the driver of the bus was responsible for the accident and the owner which is the State Transport Corporation is liable vicariously. 2. The case survives consideration only on the issue of quantum for a person who is stated to be between 70 to 80 years of age as per the post mortem report and the Tribunal took the age of a person to be 80 years. The claimants were the widow who was aged 70 years, four sons and a daughter who were above the age of 48 years. No evidence was given by any son or by a daughter as to the extent of their dependency on their father who was himself 80 years of age. The deceased-father was said to be doing business in cloth and the wife gave evidence to the effect that after husband's death, the business is not being run. In the absence of any documentary evidence, the Tribunal took the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month. I do not think that it would be appropriate to take such a high income at his ripe old age. I would take the income to be Rs. 2,500/- per month and take the contribution to his wife Rs. 1,250/-. I reject any plea of dependence for the children for want of any evidence. For the person who was aged 80 years I would apply the multiplier of 5 and the amount shall therefore, be Rs. 1250 x 12 x 5 = Rs. 75,000/-. I would add additional sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and loss to estate and another Rs. 5,000/- for loss of companionship for the widow of old age. In all the total sum payable will be Rs. 85,000/-. The widow would be entitled to 75% of the amount and the remaining 25% will be F.A.O.NO. 4302 OF 2009(O&M) 3 apportioned amongsts four sons and a daughter equally. The award shall stand reduced as above and it will carry interest @7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. The award of the Tribunal is modified and the appeal is disposed of subject to the above extent. The cross appeal for enhancement is dismissed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 22nd September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik