F.A.O. No.2361 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** F.A.O. No.2361 of 2008 Date of Decision:24.10.2008 Smt. Neelam Devi and others .....Appellants Vs. Vijay Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Tara Chand Dhanwal, Advocate for the appellants. **** HARBANS LAL, J. By filing this appeal, the appellants have sought enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani vide the award dated 8.12.07 on account of the death of Virender. The facts giving rise to the claim petition are that on 31.8.2005, Virender Singh alias Parmanand son of Krishan Singh was going on his scooter bearing Registration No.HR-16-C7561 alongwith another Virender son of Chandgi Ram to his fields. He was driving the scooter at a very moderate speed and on correct side of the road. Meanwhile, a jeep bearing registration No.HR-19-A-6392 being driven by respondent No.1 at a very high speed, rashly and negligently came from the opposite side. The jeep hit the scooter due to which both of them fell down. Virender received injuries. They were removed to the Civil Hospital, Bhiwani. Virender s/o Chandgi Ram was referred to PGI of Medical Sciences, Rohtak. Then he was taken to Lok Nayak Hospital, Delhi. On the night intervening 31.8.2005 and 1.9.2005, he succumbed to the injuries. A case was got F.A.O. No.2361 of 2008 -2- registered about this accident at Police Station Tosham under Sections 239/337 of IPC. This claim petition was resisted by the respondents. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal passed the award as noticed at the outset. Feeling that the amount of compensation awarded on account of the death of Virender Singh, since deceased is on the lower side, the appellants have preferred this appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, besides going through the findings returned by the learned Tribunal with due care and circumspection. Learned counsel for the appellants urged with a good deal of force that as is borne out from the award, the learned Tribunal has wrongly applied the cut of 1/3rd in the income of the deceased and furthermore, the Tribunal did not grant any compensation on account of transportation and medical expenditure incurred on the deceased. He further pointed out that the learned Tribunal has also not awarded any compensation on account of loss of love and affection, consortium etc., and the amount awarded on account of funeral expenses is Rs.7,000/- only, which is also on the lower side. Thus, the compensation is liable to be enhanced. I have given a deep and thoughtful consideration to these submissions. The age of the deceased was 26 years at the time of accident. The multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is 17 which seems to be on the higher side for the reason that the Apex Court has authoritatively pronounced that the multiplier should not exceed 16. Further as per the schedule appended to the Motor Vehicle Act, one third has to be deducted from the monthly income of the deceased on account of his/ her personal F.A.O. No.2361 of 2008 -3- expenses. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,85,600/- as compensation on account of loss of dependency at the rate of Rs.16,800/- per annum with the multiplier of 17. For funeral expenses and loss of consortium, a sum of Rs.7000/- has been allowed. As per the schedule appended to the above-mentioned Act, the compensation on account of funeral expenses should not exceed Rs.2,000/-. Thus, out of Rupees seven thousand, the compensation on account of loss of consortium works out to Rs.5,000/- which is quite just and reasonable. Thus, there is no scope for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. Sequelly, this appeal is dismissed. October 24, 2008 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE