IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA FAO 432 of 2004 Date of decision: 22.07.2010 Gaya Shah & others …. Appellants Versus Vinod Kumari & ors. …. Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting1? For the appellants: Mr.D.Ghosh, vice counsel. For the respondents: Mr.Sanjeev Sood, Advocate. V.K.Ahuja, J (oral) This is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solan in MAC Petition No.91-S/2 of 2002 decided on 1.8.2003 whereby he awarded a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioners are the legal representatives of deceased Daroga Shah who died in an accident on 21.6.2002 at about 8.A.M., while he was working in front of a shop at Kunihar. It was alleged that a tanker bearing registration No.PB-11-E-4955 being driven by respondent No.2 came at a high speed and struck against the deceased who was crushed. A case was registered. The petitioners are the legal representatives being his father, minor sister and brother of the deceased. They filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation to the extent of Rs.10.00 lacs. Respondent No.3 contested the petition and alleged that Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. respondent No.2 was not having a valid driving licence at the time of the accident. Other respondents simply denied the allegations. Issues were framed by the learned Tribunal and on conclusion a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- was awarded as compensation. Feeling aggrieved, the claimants have filed the present claim petition for enhancement of the compensation. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. 4. The only point worth consideration is as to whether the appellants have been awarded adequate compensation by assessing the income of the deceased. The learned Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.80/- per day and assessed his monthly income as Rs.1600/- after deducting the amount as Rs.1000/- which he was spending on his maintenance. PW-1 Gaya Shah, the father of the deceased stated that the deceased was earning Rs.200/- per day while working as a mason and taking the income of mason at Rs.150/- as Rs.150/- per day, the total monthly income comes to Rs.4500/- and deducting 1/3rd, the annual income of the deceased ought to have been assessed as Rs.3000/- and annual income at Rs.36000/-. 5. Now the next question for consideration is the multiplier to be applied. The age of the deceased was 18 years, which was not rebutted. He was unmarried and, therefore, the age of the parents has to be considered. PW-1 Gaya Shah has given his age as 55 years and the minors as aged 5 and 7 years. 6. In regard to the multiplier, the multiplier of 10 has been applied in the present case. My attention has been drawn to the latest decision of the Division Bench of this Court in New India Assurance Co. vs. Prem Chand & others Latest HLJ 2007(HP) 1046 where the age of the father was 52 years and the deceased was aged 30 years and was an unmarried person. Taking into consideration the age of the father as 52 years and after referring to the decision in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum vs. Susamma Thomas (Mrs) & others (1994) 2 SCC 176 and other decisions the Division Bench concluded that taking the age of the father as 52, the appropriate multiplier would be 12. In the present case also, the age of the father was 55 years at the time when he appeared in Court and, therefore, the multiplier of 12 can be said to be appropriate in view of the judgment of this Court and applying the multiplier of 12 to this case, the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 36000x12=4,32,000/- 7. The Court also granted Rs.5000/- only as conventional amount and applying the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 ACJ 1298. it is held that the petitioners are entitled to the following amounts: 1.Loss of estate Rs.5000-00 2.Funeral Expenses Rs.5000-00 The above amount may be added to the total compensation assessed as above. The total amount of compensation payable to the claimants comes to Rs.4,42,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. 8. The compensation shall be payable as under: Petitioner No.1 Rs. 3,42,000/- Petitioner Nos.2 & 3 Rs.50,000/- each. The shares of the minors to be invested as ordered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. 9. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is allowed along with costs including lawyers fee assessed at Rs.3500/-. 22nd July, 2010 (V.K.Ahuja),J. (SDS)