FAO No.3428 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3428 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:12.9.2011 Smt.Mamta and another ...Appellants Versus Kesar Singh and another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.LS Bhangu, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr.Arvind Bansal, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. -.- JITENDRA CHUAHAN, J. The present appeal has been filed by the claimants/ appellants seeking enhancement of amount awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kaithal (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 14.12.2010 on account of death of Kaminder Singh, husband of appellant No.1 and son of appellant No.2. Tersely put, the facts of the case are that on 12.6.2009 Kaminder Singh, deceased, was going from Narwana to Kaithal by driving his Alto Car bearing registration No.HR-05S-1292. Near village Shimla a truck bearing registration No.HR-56-3797 being driven by respondent FAO No.3428 of 2011 (O&M) 2 No.1- Kesar Singh (owner and driver of the offending truck) in a rash and negligent manner, struck his car. As a result of which, Kaminder Singh succumbed to the multiple injuries on the spot. Claimants/ appellants filed a claim petition, which was accepted by the learned Tribunal and awarded a sum of Rs.9,70,000/-, which was to be paid by the respondents jointly and severally. Feeling dissatisfied with the same, the claimants/ appellants filed the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that from the statements of PW1 Raman Gupta, Regional Manager of M/s Gharda Chemicals Ltd. Bandra (West) Mumbai, PW3 Mamta, claimant and communication Exs.P4 and P5, letters of acceptance, it appears that the deceased Kaminder Singh was working as a Sales Officer in the said company and drawing a salary of ` 2 lacs per annum. There is nothing contrary evidence on the file. However, the learned Tribunal after considering the taxable income, rightly assessed the salary of the deceased at Rs. 1.80 lac per annum. The number of claimants being number in two (wife and mother of the deceased), the annual dependency has rightly been assessed at ` 1,20,000/- after making 1/3rd deduction. It has been further stated by the learned counsel for the appellants, that the multiplier applied in the instant case is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, 2009(3) RCR FAO No.3428 of 2011 (O&M) 3 (Civil) 77. It is proved on record that the deceased was 24 years and 8 months at the time of the accident, therefore, the multiplier ought to have been applied 18 instead of 16 applied by the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel has further asserted that the learned Tribunal travelled beyond the record while applying the multiplier of 16 on his subjective satisfaction that there is every likelihood of remarriage as the widow being very young. However, the subjective satisfaction which goes contrary to the record has been ignored, particularly while interpreting the welfare legislature and on mere conjecture and surmises, neither award can be enhanced nor decreased. Accordingly, this Court feels that the multiplier should be increased and it should be 18 instead of 16 as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77 . After applying multiplier 18, the amount of compensation comes to (1,20,000 x 18) `.21,60,000/-. However, the amount awarded under the conventional heads i.e. ` 20,000 is just and adequate and therefore, there is need of interference. Learned counsel for the appellants has further argued that the interest awarded on the compensation amount is also on the lower side. In the facts and circumstances, this court feels that there is no merit in this contention, as the rate of interest has been awarded as prevalent at that time. As such, it has rightly been awarded. The enhanced amount of `2,40,000/- shall be paid within 45 FAO No.3428 of 2011 (O&M) 4 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the present appeal till the payment is made. In view of the above, the present appeal is partly allowed with the modification indicated above. 12.9.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE