FAO No. 5408 of 2011 (o&m) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 5408 of 2011 (o&m) Date of decision: 23.9.2011. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Sat Kawar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Subhash Goyal, Advocate for the appellant *** JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.(Oral) CM No. 20216-CII of 2011 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay of 62 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. Application stands disposed of accordingly. FAO No. 5408 of 2011 The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company against the award dated 9.2.2011 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind (for short 'the Tribunal') vide which the claim petition filed by the claimant-respondent No.1 has been accepted. Shortly put, the facts of the case are that on 29.10.2009, when Pala Ram (since deceased) alongwith his son Sat Kawar was going towards their house on foot, a Maruti car bearing registration No. HR99- DV- 9297 being driven by respondent No.2-Bijender Singh, hit them near FAO No. 5408 of 2011 (o&m) 2 Railway crossing at Jind- Hansi road. As a result, Pala Ram sustained a head injury and was rushed to Hospital at Barwala, where he remained admitted from 29.10.2009 to 11.11.2009 and subsequently succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, the claimant-Sat Kawar son of the deceased Pala Ram filed a claim petition, which was allowed by learned Tribunal on 9.2.2011 and awarded a sum of `4,86,469/- as compensation. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that award passed by learned Tribunal is erroneous and unsustainable in the eyes of law. He further contends that there is no evidence on record regarding the income of the deceased, whereas the learned Tribunal has assessed his income at ` 3335/ per month after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses. He further contends that the multiplier of 9 applied by the learned Tribunal is also on the higher side. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file with due care and circumspection. From the perusal of the case file, it reveals that the accident took place due to negligent driving of the driver of Maruti Car, as a result of which Pala Ram died. The son of the deceased tendered his affidavit Ex.PW/2 wherein he has stated that his father was doing business of timber and wood. In today's time, an unskilled worker is earning ` 5000/- per month, therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased, as he was a businessman. Regarding deduction made by the learned Tribunal, it has been rightly held as 1/3rd as per the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma FAO No. 5408 of 2011 (o&m) 3 and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77 . Moreover, the multiplier of 9 has rightly been applied by the Tribunal as per Smt.Sarla Verma's case (supra) as the deceased was 60 years old at the time of his death and it falls within the age group of 56- 60. As such, the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and adequate. As a sequel of the above discussion, no interference is warranted in the findings recorded by learned Tribunal. As such, the present appeal being bereft of any merit is dismissed in limine. 23.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE