F.A.O. No. 2583 of 2007 and Cross-Obj. No.5-CII of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 2583 of 2007 and Cross-Obj. No.5-CII of 2008 Date of Decision : 10.11.2008 Sohan Lal ....Appellant Versus Usha Rani and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.A.P.Bhandari, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5 – cross-objectors. Mr.Virender Singh Punia, Advocate for respondent No.6. MAHESH GROVER. J. The only point that has been urged in the present appeal is that the liability to satisfy the award could not have been fastened upon the appellant who is the registered owner of the vehicle as the offending vehicle stood already transferred pursuant to a sale to respondent No.7. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the factum of sale stood established before the Tribunal. This fact was admitted by respondent No.6 who was driver of the offending vehicle and respondent No.7 who was the subsequent vendee of the F.A.O. No. 2583 of 2007 and Cross-Obj. No.5-CII of 2008 -2- vehicle. Respondent No.7 did not appear and was proceeded ex-parte. However, the admission remained on record, implying thereby that the factum of sale and the consequent transfer had been admitted by him. On the strength of this, it was pleaded that the appellant could not have been held liable to satisfy the award. I am afraid, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted as the liability to satisfy the award pertaining to third party is of the registered owner of the vehicle. However, in the given set of circumstances of the case where the factum of sale has been admitted by respondent No.7, the appellant shall satisfy the award in the first instance and recover the same from respondent No.7 in due course of law. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. In so far as the cross-objections of respondents/claimants are concerned, it has come in evidence that the deceased was a semi- skilled worker. He was having a diploma, the certificate of which is on record and had received training in Farm Machinery. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, dependency at Rs.2,000/- and applied a multiplier of 16 considering the age of the deceased to be 29 years to arrive at a figure of Rs.3,84,000/-. Rs.20,000/- were awarded on account of loss of love and affection and consortium. Further a sum of Rs.20,000/- was awarded on account of last rites. In this manner, a total compensation of Rs.4,24,000/- was awarded along with interest at the rate 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of its realisation. F.A.O. No. 2583 of 2007 and Cross-Obj. No.5-CII of 2008 -3- In the cross-objections the objectors have pleaded that the amount awarded is inadequate. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the award, I am of the considered opinion that the award needs to be modified slightly. The deceased was certainly a skilled labourer. He was a literate man with a diploma, the certificate of which is on record and had also received training of Farm Machinery. In this view of the matter, his income, which has been assessed at Rs.3,000/- per month seems to be marginally on the lesser side. The accident in this case took place on 13.6.2005. During that time even an unskilled ordinary labour earned Rs.3,000/- per month. There is, however, no evidence on record regarding his income, therefore it is difficult to pin point exactly as to which the deceased was earning. In any eventuality, as the deceased was a skilled labourer, it would be safe to assess his income at Rs.3,500/- per month. Considering the number of dependents that the deceased left behind i.e. wife, two minor sons and parents, it would be safe to deduct 1/4th of the income for personal expenses. In this manner the dependency works out to Rs.2,625/- per month or Rs.31,500/- per annum. A multiplier of 18 should have been just and adequate keeping in view the schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act which is the guiding factor. The compensation in this manner works out to Rs.5,67,000/-. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal on account of loss of love and affection and funeral expenses do not warrant any interference. Total compensation thus comes to Rs.6,07,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be paid to F.A.O. No. 2583 of 2007 and Cross-Obj. No.5-CII of 2008 -4- the cross-objectors along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realisation. The amount of Rs.25,000/- which has been deposited before this Court by way of compliance of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act shall be remitted to the Tribunal for onward disbursal to the claimants. The liability to satisfy the award shall be in the same manner as has been stated above. Cross-objections stand allowed. 10.11.2008 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss