FAO No.3025 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3025 of 2011 (O&M) in MACT Petition No.RT-49 of 2008 Date of Decision : 17.11.2011 Smt. Saroj and others .......Appellants Versus Vijay and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Mukesh Yadav, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the Insurance Company. **** JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL) CM No.10129 of 2011 CM application is allowed. Delay of 177 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Main case The claimants-appellants have come in appeal against the impunged Award dated 25.5.2010, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation. 1 FAO No.3025 of 2011 Brief facts of the case in hand are that on 20.4.2008, appellant, Ravi Kumar, his father Devender (since deceased), and Deepak were going to their village Ganiyar on their respective bicycles from Kathuwas. When they reached near Village Chandpura, the dumper bearing No.HR-55D-3653, (hereinafter ‘the offending vehicle’) which was being driven by respondent No.1, the driver, rashly and negligently, came from the opposite side and dashed into the bicycle of Devender. Resultantly, Devender sustained multiple injuries. He was removed to the General Hospital, Narnaul, where he was declared dead. The driver fled from the spot after causing the accident. FIR No.79 dated 21.4.2008 under Sections 279, 304-A IPC was registered at Police Station Ateli. In this background, the claimants preferred the claim petition before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation. The learned Tribunal granted an amount of `2,02,000/- as compensation. Enhancement thereof has been sought by way of the present appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The age of the deceased, Devender, as per the claim petition as well as the post mortem report, Ex.P2, was 50 years at the time of his death in the accident. The learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 8 while assessing the compensation. In view of the law laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, the correct multiplier to be applied in the instant case is 13. 2 FAO No.3025 of 2011 Therefore, the multiplier of 8 as applied by the learned Tribunal is increased to 13. The learned Tribunal has further erred in determining the income of the deceased as `3,000/- per month, which is less than the amount prescribed by the Haryana Government vide its Notification No.10664-774 dated 31.03.2009, under the Minimum Wages Act, wherein, the minimum wages provided for unskilled worker is `3,510/-. As per the testimony of PW3, Saroj, the widow of the deceased, the deceased was employed in a stone crushing unit and had been supporting a big family consisting of six members. Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased will be deemed to be `3,510/- per month as per the notification. The learned Tribunal, while assessing the compensation, made deduction to the extent of 1/3rd of the total income of the deceased on account of his personal expenses. However, keeping in view the number of claimants, which is six in the present case, the deduction should have been to the extent of 1/4th in view of the principle laid down by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case (supra). It is ordered accordingly. In view of the above, the total amount of compensation on account of loss of dependency comes to ` 4,10,670/- (` 3510 X ¾ X 12 X 13) and the claimants-appellants are held entitled to the enhanced compensation of ` 2,18,670/- (`4,10.670/- – `1,92,000/-). The compensation awarded under all the other heads is just and appropriate. 3 FAO No.3025 of 2011 The enhanced amount of compensation shall be payable to the claimants-appellants within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, failing which, they shall also be entitled to interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the present appeal, till its realization. The present appeal is partly allowed and the Award of the learned Tribunal dated 25.5.2010 is modified to the extent indicated above. ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) 17.11.2011 JUDGE atulsethi Note: Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No 4