IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. F.A.O. No. 1077 of 1987 Date of Decision: 25.11.2008 Mrs.Ranju Sinha ....... Appellant through Shri R.S.Chahal, Advocate. Versus Rakesh Kumar and another. ....... Respondents through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? .... Mahesh Grover,J. This appeal is directed against award dated 20.8.1987 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (for short, `the Tribunal') in M.A.C.T.Petition No.19 of 1986. The appellant is the widow of Dr.S.K.Sinha, who lost his life in an accident which took place on 3.4.1986. At the time of his death, he was working as Associate Professor in Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar was drawing a salary of Rs.3165/- per month, which was proved on record. On a claim petition having been filed by the appellant, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- as compensation to her along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The dependency of the appellant was F.A.O.No.1077 of 1987 -2- .... assessed as Rs.750/- per month and a multiplier of `16' was applied. The liability to pay the amount of compensation and interest was fastened upon the driver and owner, i.e., the respondents, of the offending motor-cycle. Dis-satisfied with the award, the appellant has come up in appeal. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the record, I am of the view that the the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Admittedly, the deceased was working as an Associate Professor. He was drawing a salary of Rs.3165/- per month. He would have certainly progressed in his life had it not been cut short. Therefore, the future prospects should have been taken into consideration while assessing his income. The principle to assess the income of a victim by taking into consideration the future prospects is to double the salary and then add the amount of monthly salary to it and take the average of these two figures. By applying this principle, the monthly income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.4747/- (Rs.3165 +3165 = 6330/- + 3165 = 9495 divided by 2 = 4747). In my view, a cut of 1/3rd deserves to be applied to the aforesaid income on account of the personal expenses of the deceased for assessing the dependency of the appellant. Accordingly, the monthly dependency of the deceased is assessed at Rs.3165/-, i.e., Rs.37980/- per annum. The deceased was about 33 years of age at the time of the accident. As per the Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act,1988, which is F.A.O.No.1077 of 1987 -3- .... a guiding factor, the multiplier of `17' is to be applied in the case of the victims of accident within the age group of 30 to 35 years. Thus, the multiplier of `17' is adopted and in this way, the compensation comes to Rs.6,45,660/- (37980 x 17). In addition, a sum of Rs.20,000/- also deserves to be allowed on account of funeral expenses and loss of estate etc. In this way, the total compensation works out to Rs.6,65,660/- to which the appellant is held entitled to. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be payable to the appellant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. The liability to pay the enhanced compensation and interest shall be the same as has been fixed by the Tribunal. The impugned award is modified to the above extent and the appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. November 25,2008 ( Mahesh Grover ) “SCM” Judge