FAO No.4456 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4456 of 2011 Date of decision: 14.11.2011 Jasbir Singh @ Bittu and another ...Appellants Versus Rajwant Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Sandeep Wadhawan, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Rajinder Sharma, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for respondent No.4-Insurance Company **** Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral) The present appeal has been filed by the appellants i.e. Driver and Owner of the offending Truck bearing registration No.PB-05-7636, assailing the award dated 21.2.2011 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Amritsar (for short 'the Tribunal') vide which, the claim petitions i.e. MACT Nos. 22 of 2009 and 32 of 2009 of the claimants- respondent Nos. 1 to 3 were allowed. Two claim petitions were filed on account of unfortunate accident, in which a newly wedded couple perished. One claim petition i.e. MACT No.22 of 2009 was filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2, parents of deceased Amarbir Singh and another i.e. MACT No.32 of 2009 was filed by Satnam Kaur respondent No.3, mother of deceased Navjot Kaur. Both the claim petitions having arisen out of the same accident were consolidated and decided by a common award dated 21.2.2011 by the learned Tribunal. FAO No.4456 of 2011 -2- Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the deduction towards personal expenses should be taken to the extent of 50% in the case of deceased Navjot Kaur, as the mother of the deceased is the sole appellant. He further contends that in the case of deceased Amarbir Singh, the claimants being the parents of the deceased, deduction towards personal expenses should be made to the extent of 50%, whereas the learned Tribunal assessed the dependency of 2/3rd in both the cases. He further contends that the age of the claimants should be taken in to consideration for applying the multiplier and determining the compensation. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the claimants- respondent Nos. 1 to 3 has stated that the amount of deduction cannot be 50% in view of the fact that the deceased, son and daughter of the appellants-claimants were married at the time of their death. However, he has not been able to controvert the submission regarding the multiplier, which would be taken according to the age of the claimants. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. The submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants that the deduction should be made to the extent of 50% cannot be accepted keeping in view the marital status of both the deceased. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77 , the deduction to the extent of 50% should only be made in case the deceased is a bachelor, whereas in the instant case, the deceased were a newly wedded couple. As such, the learned Tribunal has rightly applied the cut of 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of both the deceased. FAO No.4456 of 2011 -3- However, the submission that the learned Tribunal, taking into consideration the age of both the deceased, applied the multiplier of 18, which is wrong and the same should be applied according to the age of the parents of the deceased as per Smt.Sarla Verma's case, is accepted. As per the claim petition filed by Iqbal Singh and Rajwant Kaur, the age of Iqbal Singh, father of the deceased, was 51 years and age of the Satnam Kaur, mother of deceased Navjot Kaur, as per the claim petition, was 48 years. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt.Sarla Verma's case, multiplier of 11 should have been applied in case of deceased Amarbir Singh and 13 should have been applied in case of deceased Navjot Kaur. Ordered accordingly. Vide the impugned Award, in both the claim petitions, the income of the deceased has been assessed at `40,000/- per annum each and ` 13000/- each has been deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased, which is adequate. No other point has been urged or agitated by either counsel for the parties. In view of the above, the compensation in case of deceased Amarbir Singh comes to ` 2,97,000/-(27,000 x 11) in MACT No.22 of 2009 and in case of Navjot Kaur it comes to ` 3,51,000/- (27000 x 13) in MACT No.32 of 2009. The present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified in the manner indicated above. 14.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE