IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA FAO No.: 94 of 2006. Date of decision : 10.09.2009 H.R.T.C and another …Appellants Versus Bimla Devi and others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the Appellants: Mr.H.S.Rawat, Advocate. For the respondents No. 1 to 7: Mr. Vikas Rathour, Advocate. For the respondent No. 8: Mr. Rajinder Thakur vice Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) This appeal by the HRTC is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chamba, dated 30.12.2005 in M.A.C.Petition No. 84 of 2004, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.6,07,000/- in favour of the claimants. The main challenge to this award is on the ground of assessment of compensation. According to Shri Rawat, learned counsel for the appellants, the assessment made by the learned Tribunal is highly excessive. He submits that while assessing the damages the learned Tribunal has not followed the principles laid down by this Court as well as by the Apex Court in a large number of decisions. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 The facts necessary for the decision of the case are that Chandu Ram, deceased, died in an accident in which he was travelling on 2.12.2003. This bus was owned by the HRTC. As per the statement of the PW-2 Balwant Singh, son of the deceased, his father was 49 years at the time of his death. The deceased was a Goldsmith. It was alleged that he was earning Rs.11,000/- at the time of his death. The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month. However, after assessing the income at Rs.3,000/- per month he also assessed loss to the petitioners on account of the death of the deceased at the same amount. This could not have been done. If Rs.3,000/- was the income then the loss of the dependency had to be less than Rs.3,000/-. Even otherwise, assuming that the income of the deceased was more than Rs.3,000/- per month, he was a shop keeper working as a Goldsmith. His shop did not vanish into this year and his children who are all majors inherit the said shop. The entire business was not lost. Even if, the income is assessed at Rs.3,000/- per month and 1/3rd is deducted for the personal expenses of the deceased the loss of dependency is only Rs.2,000/- per month. The deceased was admittedly 49 years old. He left behind a widow aged about 45 years and as many as six children, all of whom were majors. In fact, there is virtually no evidence on record to show that any of the children were dependent on the deceased. Multiplier of 15 had been used for the deceased, who was aged 49 years. This multiplier is very excessive. The Apex Court in a number of cases 3 has held that the multiplier given in the 2nd Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act can be used as a guide. For a person aged about 45 to 50 years the proper multiplier is 13 and for a person aged between 50 to 55 years it is 11. Even if the multiplier is applied at the higher side at best the multiplier of 13 can be applied in the present case. If this multiplier is used, the compensation payable for loss of dependency works out to Rs.2,000x12x13= Rs.3,12,000/-. It is well established principle of law that when multiplier system is used the claimants are thereafter not entitled to any other sums except nominal amount which is known as conventional amount. Some amount on account of loss of consortium and the expenses on the treatment of the deceased, if any, post death ceremonies, etc. of the deceased may also be allowed. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in the present case has awarded Rs.50,000/- under the head of “Loss of living being of the family”. This head is unknown to law and in none of the authorities of the Apex Court or this Court compensation has been granted under this head. The learned Tribunal also awarded Rs.15,000/- for post death ceremonies. In my view, the reasonable amount for post death ceremony would be Rs.8,000/-. Claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- as conventional amount and widow would be entitled another sum of Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium. Total compensation, therefore, works out to Rs.3,40,000/-. The interest shall be payable as awarded by the learned Tribunal. 4 In view of the above discussion, the award of the learned Tribunal is partly set-aside and the compensation reduced from Rs.6,07,000/- to Rs.3,40,000/- with interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. 10th September, 2009 ( Deepak Gupta ) ™ Judge.