FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M.Nos.2595 and 2596-CII of 2011 in FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 6.9.2011 Rajesh Kumar and Another Appellants v. Vidyanand and Others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Arun Yadav,Advocate for the appellants None for respondent No.1 Mr.P.R.Yadav,Advocate for respondent No.2 Mr.Vijay Kumar Garg,Advocate for respondent No.3 .... JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. C.M.Nos. 2595-CII and 2596-CII of 2011 For the reasons recorded in the applications, the same are allowed. Delay of 18 days in filing, and 86 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. Main Appeal This appeal has been filed by appellants against Award dated 26.11.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (for short the Tribunal) Rewari. Brief facts of the case are that on 23.9.2007 at 8.30 a.m. Manoj Kumar, 'deceased' was standing at Bus Stand, Dharuhera Chowk, Rewari for going to his village Mandola, District Rewari. Meanwhile, Bus bearing registration No. DL-1PB/8985 (offending Bus) driven by Vidyanand hit the FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) 2 deceased, as a result he sustained multiple injuries and succumbed to his injuries. FIR No. 261 dated 23.9.2007 under sections 279/304-A IPC was registered at Police Station, City Rewari. Parents of the deceased Manoj Kumar filed claim petition before the Tribunal. On notice, respondent Nos.1 and 2,driver and owner of the offending Bus filed written statements denying the occurrence of accident. In the written statement filed by Respondent No.3, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (for short the 'Insurance Company') a stand was taken that the driver of the offending bus was not holding valid and effective driving licence and the said bus was being plied without valid route permit and that it was in breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were raised: 1. Whether the accident which took place on 23.9.2007 at about 8.30.a.m.at Dharuhera Chowk, Delhi Road, Police Station, City Rewari had occurred due to use of Bus No. DL- 1PB/8985? OPP 2. What is the amount of compensation to which petitioners shall be entitled to, on account of death of Manoj Kumar in the motor vehicular accident and from whom, if issue No.1 is decided in favour of petitioners? OPP 3. Whether the petitioners have no cause of action to file present petition? OPR 4. Whether the petition is not maintainable in present form? OPR 5. Whether the driver of Bus was not holding a valid and FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) 3 effective driving licence at the time of accident, if so to what effect? OPR-3 6. Whether insured violated the terms and conditionsof insurance policy, if so to what effect? OPR-3 7. Relief.” After appreciation of entire evidence on record, the Ld. Tribunal accepted the claim petition of the claimants and awarded a sum of Rs. 2,04,500/- by observing as under:- “19. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that on 23.9.2007, during accident Manoj Kumar had succumbed to his injuries. Post-Mortem on his dead body was conducted by PW1 Dr. Ashok Ranga. Copy of post-mortem report is Ex. PW1/A. In post-mortem age of deceased is mentioned as 28 years. PW4 Rajesh Kumar petitioner claimed that Manoj Kumar, his son, was aged 27 years and earning Rs. 3300/- per month by working as a security guard. He tendered photocopy of Senior Secondary School Examination Ex.PW3/1. In certificate, date of birth of the deceased is mentioned as 3.7.1980. Therefore, the age of deceased Manoj Kumar is determined as 27 years. No document regarding income has been proved. The income of deceased is determined as Rs. 3300/- per month as per statement of PW4 Rajesh Kumar, petitioner and minimum wages norms. By applying cut of 1/3rd dependency of petitioners comes to Rs. 2200/- per month. In view of the age of he deceased and the petitioners multiplier of “10” being FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) 4 appropriate deserves to be applied. Since deceased was of marriageable age he would have married in a period of about five years. After marriage the dependency of petitioners would have been reduced further to Rs. 1100/- per month. Petitioners shall be entitled to compensation of Rs. 2200X12X5+Rs.1100X12X5=1,98,000/-. Petitioners shall also be entitled to Rs. 2000/- as funeral expenses and Rs. 2500/- as loss of estate and Rs. 2000/- as transportation expenses. Therefore, petitioners shall be entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,98,000+Rs.2000+Rs.2500+Rs.2000=Rs.2,04,500/-. “ The Ld. Tribunal further observed that respondents No. 1 to 3 were liable jointly and severally to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Ld. Tribunal has applied multiplier of 10, which is inadequate, and it should have been 17, and the amounts awarded towards funeral charges, loss of estate and transportation charges are also not adequate and are contrary to the settled law laid down in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another 2009 (6) SC Cases 121. He prays that keeping in view the age of the deceased and the fact that he is the only bread earner in the family, and his parents (appellants) are dependent upon him, the multiplier and the amounts towards funeral charges; loss of estate and transportation charges may be enhanced. The learned Counsel for the Insurance Company has not controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent-claimants. FAO No. 964 of 2011 (O&M) 5 In view of the law laid down in Sarla Verma's case (supra) this Court feels that the ends of justice would be met if the multiplier is enhanced to 13 and the amount towards the three heads mentioned above is enhanced as under:- Funeral charges to Rs. 10,000/- Loss of Estate Rs. to 10,000/- Transportation Charges to Rs. 5000/- In view of the above, the Award dated 26.11.2009 is modified to that extent. The amount of Rs. 25000/ shall be paid within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the amount is not paid within the stipulated period, the same shall carry interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the appeal till its realization. The appeal stands partly allowed with the above modification. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) 6.9.2011 JUDGE MS