IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.No.34 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision 28.08.2009 Om Parkash and another ......Appellants VERSUS Shri Krishan and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: None for the appellants. Mr.Pradeep Bedi, Advocate, for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): This appeal for enhancement is directed against the order dated 02.08.2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.1,68,400/- in favour of the appellants- claimants (herein referred as 'the claimants') and against the respondents jointly and severally on account of the death of Rajinder Singh aged about 20 years in a motor vehicle accident. Neither the negligence nor the liability of respondents No.1 has been challenged. However, the appellants have sought enhancement of compensation. Heard. It has come in evidence that the deceased Rajinder Singh aged about 20 years, was working as a helper-cum-Mistri in a private factory. The Tribunal fell in error while considering his income as Rs.2400/- per month. Even a daily waiger earns not less than Rs.100/- per day i.e. Rs.3,000/- per month. The multiplier of 11 as applied by the Tribunal is also not suitable in this case. As per judgment delivered in case Smt.Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) Page 77 the Apex Court has issued the F.A.O.No.34 of 2008 (O&M) -2- guidelines for applying a multiplier of 18 in such cases. The Tribunal also fell in error while making deduction of 1/2nd instead of 1/3rd. Though, the deceased was 20 years old and he was likely to be married within a year or so, then his dependency should have been reduced towards his parents and enhanced towards his family, therefore, we cannot calculate his dependency to the extent of 1/2nd but it would not be less than 1/3rd. Thus, while assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3rd which he must be spending upon himself, the net dependency towards the appellants comes to Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. While applying a multiplier of 18, it comes to Rs.4,32,000/-. The Tribunal also fell in error in not awarding anything on account of love and affection, loss of estate and consortium. As such, I award a sum of Rs.20,000/- on the aforesaid heads. Resultantly, this appeal is partly accepted and the impugned award is modified by enhancing compensation to the tune of Rs.2,83,600/- over and above the award amount. However, the appellants would also be entitled to receive the interest on the enhanced amount at the same terms as awarded by the Tribunal. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 28.08.2009 mamta-II