FAO No. 1328 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1328 of 2008 Date of decision 25.5.2009. Kuldeep Kaur and others ...... Appellants. versus Union of India and others ...... Respondents. Present : Mr. L.S.Bhangu, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. S.K.Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. L.N.MITTAL,J.(Oral) This is appeal by claimants for enhancement of compensation awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala vide award dated 17.10.2007. Kuldeep Kaur claimant No.1, who is widow of the deceased, appeared as PW-1 and deposed that her husband Nirmal Singh deceased was agriculturist and supplemented his income by selling milk. He cultivated the land of his father. However, except said bald, oral and self-serving statement, no documentary evidence regarding occupation and income of the deceased was adduced. The Tribunal, therefore, determined income of the deceased to be Rs.2400/- per month as unskilled worker. Dependency FAO No. 1328 of 2008 2 was assessed at 2/3rd of the income of the deceased, who was aged 30 years. Multiplier of 15 was applied. A sum of Rs.5000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.2000/- for loss of consortium was also added, making the total compensation as Rs.2,95,000/-. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the deceased was an agriculturist and was cultivating land of his father. However, there is not even a shred of evidence in support of this contention except bald, oral and self-serving statement of claimant No.1, which is not sufficient to accept this contention. On the other hand, adverse inference arises against the claimants for not placing on record necessary revenue record to substantiate this plea of the claimants. Learned counsel for the appellants next contended that even an unskilled worker earned more than Rs.2400/- per month. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that minimum wages at the relevant time were Rs.3000/- per month. However, learned counsel for the appellants is unable to substantiate this contention by showing any notification or order of the competent authority. Be that as it may, the accident occurred on 14.4.2005. The normal income of an unskilled worker at that time may be taken to be Rs.2500/- instead of Rs.2400/- per month as determined by the Tribunal. The dependency comes to Rs.20,000/- per annum. Learned counsel for the appellants also contended that multiplier of 15 for the deceased aged 30 years is inadequate and requires to be enhanced to 18. FAO No. 1328 of 2008 3 The contention has been opposed by learned counsel for the respondents. I have carefully considered the contention and in my considered view, multiplier of 16 would be just and appropriate. Applying the same, the compensation amount comes to Rs.3,20,000/-, In addition to the aforesaid, the amount of Rs.2000/- for loss of consortium is found to be inadequate and the same is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- while retaining the amount of Rs.5000/- for funeral expenses. The total compensation, thus, comes to Rs.3,35,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellants next contended that interest @ 6% per annum awarded by the Tribunal is also insufficient. The contention merits acceptance. Interest needs to be enhanced to 8% per annum. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award dated 17.10.2007 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala is modified and the claimants/appellants are awarded compensation of Rs.3,35,000/- in all along with interest thereon @ 8% per annum w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim petition till recovery. The respondents are jointly and severally liable for payment of the compensation amount. ( L.N.MITTAL ) JUDGE May 25, 2009 sv