F.A.O.NO. 2485 OF 1998 and F.A.O.NO. 2486 OF 1998 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 2485 OF 1998 Date of decision:10th September, 2010 Smt. Mewa Devi and others .......Appellants Versus Raja Ram and others ........Respondents F.A.O.NO. 2486 OF 1998 Attar Singh ......Appellant Versus Raja Ram and others .......Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Pardeep Goyal, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The above two appeals relate to claim for enhancement of compensation one by the representatives of the deceased i.e. FAO No. 2485 of 1998 and another by the claimant who suffered injuries in the accident i.e. FAO NO 2486 of 1998. The connected FAO No. 2484 of 1998 was disposed of by this F.A.O.NO. 2485 OF 1998 and F.A.O.NO. 2486 OF 1998 2 Court on 30.08.2010, which was filed for claim for the death of the owner of the truck in the accident, the driver had also died in the said accident. The Tribunal had taken the income of the driver to be Rs. 1,200/- per month and accordingly his compensation worked out. 2. In FAO NO. 2485 of 1998, the owner of the truck was said to be earning about Rs. 10,000/- per month by offering vehicles for hire. The income must be calculated on the basis of managerial abilities of the person who was doing the business in hiring the truck. I would take the income of the owner to be Rs. 3,000/- per month. He had a widow, four sons and a daughter. He was 48 years of age. I would make a deduction of 1/5th for his personal expenses and take Rs. 2,400/- as the contribution to the family. The Tribunal has adopted a multiplier of 16 for a person aged 48 and I am of the view that the appropriate multiplier shall be 13 and the compensation that shall become payable shall be Rs. 3,74,400/-. All the children were minors and I would provide each Rs. 5,000/- for loss of love and affection and provide another Rs. 5.000/- for the widow as loss of consortium. I would add another Rs. 5,000/- to loss to estate and funeral expenses. The amount would aggregate to Rs. 4,09,400/-. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 1,72,800/- and the amount in excess shall bear interest of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. Since the accident has taken place more than 12 years prior to the time when the case taken up for final hearing, the F.A.O.NO. 2485 OF 1998 and F.A.O.NO. 2486 OF 1998 3 entire amount may be disbursed to the claimant immediately. If there is any minor amongst the children, the same shall be deposited in an appropriate fixed deposit at the Tribunal for the period of his minority and the same shall be released on attaining majority. The primary liability shall be on the insurer but it will have all right of recovery against the insured by the fact that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. This had already been held so in the decision rendered by this Court in FAO No. 2484 of 1998. 4. As regards the claim in in FAO NO. 2486 of 2008, the counsel is unable to show any better information than what had already been available before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that simple injuries were suffered by the injured person and a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- was appropriate. He had claimed Rs. 50,000/- in the petition. The claim was found exaggerated. I confirm the award and dismiss the appeal. The claimant shall, however, have a right of recovery against the insurer and the insurer in turn could recover against the insured in terms of the findings rendered by me in the connected case. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 10th September, 2010 Shivani Kaushik