F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 1 .. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 30th,2011 Raj Rani and others .... Appellants Versus Virender Singh and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Gautam Kaile, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Ms. Vandana Malhotra , Advocate, for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J. This is an appeal of the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded to them in a sum of ` 3,95,600/- by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat (for short, "the Tribunal") vide award dated 9.12.2009. Since the enhancement is sought making submissions on the points of income, age of deceased, application of cut to assess the dependency and loss of consortium etc., there is no need to notice the facts pertaining to the manner of accident. Bharat Singh, who met with an accident on 6.2.2008, F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 2 .. was 48 years of age at the time of his death and was working as driver with Century Seeds and was earning ` 3,300/- per month as salary. He was the only bread winning member of the family. The claimants are his widow and his children, who are five in number. The claim petition has been resisted on various other grounds but not on the facts mentioned above. After framing of issues and taking evidence and hearing learned counsel represent them, learned Tribunal made the impugned award. Dissatisfied with the award, the claimants have brought this appeal. I have heard Shri Ram Pal Verma, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri Gautam Kaile, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 and Ms. Vandana Malhotra, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and have gone through the record. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as ` 3300/- per month. This is the income of the deceased, as is claimed by the claimants and, therefore, there is no reason for the challenge of the award on this point. The first point, on which the award is questioned, therefore, is the application of cut of 1/4th to the income of the deceased. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that taking into account the number of the claimants, who are five in number, the Tribunal should have adopted a cut of 1/5th for personal expenses of the deceased on himself. According to him, the cut of 1/4th F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 3 .. adopted by the Tribunal is not correct. The next submission is that the deceased was taken as aged 48 years, while he should have been taken to be in the age group of 40 to 45 years and the multiplier of 14 should have been adopted. It is also submitted that learned Tribunal has allowed a sum of ` 5,000/- as loss of consortium, ` 2,000/- for funeral expenses and ` 2,500/- towards loss of estate, which is less. Learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that the age of the deceased has been rightly found to be 48 years. According to them, as per the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court of India in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77, the multiplier of 13 is to be adopted for the age group of 46 to 50 years. They have submitted that only the amount of loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses have been awarded on lesser side. The claimants have submitted a ration card (Exhibit P5) showing the age of deceased as 40 years. However, the post mortem report (Exhibit P4) mentioned the age of the deceased as 48 years. Since the age mentioned before the doctor conducting autopsy cannot be held to be precise, much reliance could not be placed on the age of the deceased available in the post mortem report and there was room for submission that the age was wrongly taken by the Tribunal. However, in this case, there could be no F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 4 .. such doubt about the age of the deceased because Krishan Kumar (PW1) is none other than claimant No. 3 and he has given the age of his father as 48 years. Therefore, learned Tribunal has placed reliance on his statement and now it cannot be argued on behalf of the claimants that the age of the deceased was below 48 years. In Smt. Sarla Verma's case (supra), it has been mentioned that if the number of dependent family members was between 4 to 6, the cut is to be 1/4th. The claimants here are 5 and, therefore, the deduction made by the Tribunal is as per the ratio of Smt. Sarla Verma's case (supra). However, award of ` 5,000/- for loss of consortium, ` 2,000/- for funeral expenses and ` 2,500/- towards loss of estate is on the lower side. As per the ratio of Smt. Sarla Verma's case (supra), this amount should have been ` 10,000/- for loss of consortium, ` 5,000/- for loss of estate and ` 5,000/- towards funeral expenses. The amount of ` 3,86,100/- has been rightly calculated by the Tribunal regarding the loss suffered by the claimants in the death of Bharat Singh. Adding to it, a sum of ` 20,000/-, I find the compensation payable to the claimants to be ` 4,06,100/- and consequently, accept the appeal and enhance the award to ` 4,06,100/-. The amount shall be shared by the claimants in the proportion F.A.O. No. 5555 of 2010 5 .. laid by the Tribunal with other terms regarding rate of interest etc. remaining the same. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE September 30th , 2011 som