MAC .APP.No.328/2007 Page 1 of 3 25 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP.No.328/2007 Date of Decision: 20th July, 2009 % PRAMOD KUMAR KOHLI & ANR ..... Appellants Through : Mr. Sanjay Mishra, Adv. versus AMAR NATH & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Adv. for R-3. CORAM :- THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may Yes be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be Yes reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT (Oral) 1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.3,59,000/- has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount. 2. The accident dated 30th August, 2002 resulted in the death of Rochan Kohli aged 19 years. The deceased was survived by his parents who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. MAC .APP.No.328/2007 Page 2 of 3 3. The learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.3,59,000/- by applying the multiplier of 12 considering the age of the mother to be 43 years. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged only two grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal. The first ground of challenge is that the appropriate multiplier according to the age of the mother is 14 and, therefore, the multiplier be enhanced from 12 to 14. The second ground of challenge is that the claim petition was filed before the learned Tribunal on 25th September, 2002 but the learned Tribunal has mentioned the date of filing of the petition as 3rd March, 2003 on the award due to which the petitioner has lost interest for the period 25th September, 2002 to 2nd March, 2003. 5. The age of the mother of the deceased at the time of the accident was 43 years and, therefore, the appropriate multiplier according to the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (6) Scale 129 is 14. The multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is, therefore, enhanced from 12 to 14. The appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs.4,03,000/- (Rs.27,000 x 14 + Rs.25,000) by applying the multiplier of 14 instead of 12. 6. The LCR of this case has been perused. The appellants had filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal on 25th September, 2002. The date of filing of the petition MAC .APP.No.328/2007 Page 3 of 3 mentioned on the award is, therefore, corrected and 3rd March, 2003 mentioned on the award be read as 25th September, 2002 and the appellants are entitled to interest from the said date. 7. The appeal is allowed and the award amount is enhanced from Rs.3,59,000/- to Rs.4,03,000/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition, i.e., 25th September, 2002 till the date of payment. 8. On the request of the learned counsel for respondent No.3, it is clarified that the appellants shall be entitled to the interest on Rs.3,59,000/- from 25th September, 2002 up to 2nd March, 2003 and on the enhanced amount of Rs.44,000/- from 25th September, 2002 till the date of payment. 9. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the amount along with interest thereon with the learned Tribunal within 30 days. The learned Tribunal shall release 50% of the award amount to appellant No.1. The remaining amount be kept in fixed deposit for a period of three years. 10. Copy of this order be given ‘Dasti’ to learned counsel for the parties under the signature of Court Master. J.R. MIDHA, J JULY 20, 2009 aj