FAO No.3919 of 2008(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.3919 of 2008(O&M) Decided on : November 17, 2009 The Transport Department through its Secretary, Haryana, Chd. ... Appellant VERSUS Gurmail Kaur and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mrs.Mamta Singla Talwar, Assistant Advocate General Haryana for the appellant. Mr.R.S.Longia, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5. Mr.M.B.Jain, Advocate for respondent No.6. A.N.JINDAL, J.- This appeal by the State of Haryana is directed against the judgment dated 13.8.2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Kurukshetra (herein referred as `the Tribunal') awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.9,75,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, in favour of the claimants – respondents No.1 to 5 (herein referred as `the claimants') and against the appellant – State of Haryana (herein referred as `the appellant') and respondents No.6 and 7. The appellant without challenging the negligence and liability FAO No.3919 of 2008(O&M) [ 2 ] to pay the compensation, has urged only that the deceased Ravail Singh died at the age of 46 years. The Tribunal fell into error while computing the compensation on the basis of agricultural income from the land measuring 24 Kanals to the tune of Rs.1,20,000/- per annum. Since the land cannot be said to be lost on the death of the person, therefore, the income could be assessed on the basis of what he was contributing to make yield over the land. Having scrutinised the impugned judgment, it transpires that the deceased Ravail Singh was a good agriculturist. Besides cultivating his own land, he used to cultivate other land by getting the same on lease. He had also purchased some land out of the earnings from agriculture and he was maintaining a family consisting of his wife, three children and father. Besides, he was also running a milk dairy. In the circumstances, the labour, which he was contributing towards the agriculture for flourishing it, cannot be assessed less than Rs.4000/- per month. Besides, he must be earning Rs.1200/- per month from his dairy business. Thus, while assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.5200/- per month and after deducting 1/4th towards his self-dependency, the net dependency of the claimants comes to Rs.3900/- per month i.e. Rs.46,800/- per annum. Keeping in view the age of the deceased and the family from which he was hailing, multiplier of 12 would be appropriate, to be applied in the present case and in this way, the total dependency comes to Rs.5,61,600/-. Further more, it would be in the fitness of things to add a sum of Rs.38,400/- on account of the loss of consortium, loss of estate, transportation charges, funeral and last rites. Considering all aspects of FAO No.3919 of 2008(O&M) [ 3 ] the case and the evidence led by the parties, the total compensation could not be more than Rs.6,00,000/-. For the foregoing reasons, while holding that the Tribunal had awarded the exaggerated compensation, the findings on Issue No.2 are modified to the extent that the compensation is reduced to Rs.6 lacs, while the findings on the remaining issues are affirmed. Resultantly, the appeal is partly allowed and the compensation is reduced to Rs.6 lacs along with interest @ 7.5.% per annum from the date of the claim petition, till realisation of the entire amount. No order as to costs. November 17, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE