FAO No. 3768 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 3768 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 30.3.2010 ... Nirmala Devi and others ................Appellants vs. Sher Singh and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. A.S. Sayan, Advocate for the appellants Sh. Vinod Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2. Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Advocate for respondent No.5. ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) This is an appeal directed by Nirmala Devi-widow, Sandeep Kumar-son and Lajwanti – mother of Jagdish Chand, claiming compensation on account of death of Jagdish Chand in a motor vehicular accident. The Tribunal accepted the claim petition and awarded an amount of Rs.4,62,000/- to the claimants. The income of the deceased was taken as Rs.5,000/- per month and the dependency was taken as Rs.3,500/- per month and the yearly dependency was taken FAO No. 3768 of 2009 -2- as Rs.42,000/- (3500 X 12) and multiplier applied by the Tribunal was 11. In this manner, the amount was calculated as Rs.4,62,000/- (42,000 X 11). The widow was also allowed an amount of Rs.18,000/- on account of loss of consortium. An amount of Rs.12,000/- was granted towards transportation charges and Rs.10,000/- was granted towards funeral ceremonies. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that income of the deceased has been taken on lower side. PW-2 Sandeep Kumar has stated that deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. RW-1 Radhe Sham has also stated that usually the drivers get salary of Rs.8,000-10,000 per month. So, the income of the deceased has been taken on the lower side. I have considered the said submission, but do not find any force in that submission in the absence of any documentary evidence. The income of the deceased has been rightly taken as Rs.5,000/- per month. The dependency has also been taken correctly as Rs.3,500/- per month and yearly dependency has also been rightly taken as Rs.42,000/- per annum. The other contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that age of the deceased was 40 years. In the post mortem report also, the age of the deceased is mentioned as 40 years. The Tribunal relying upon the testimony of PW-2 Sandeep Kumar has assessed the age of the deceased as 48 years. It is submitted that the age of the deceased be taken as 40 years. Counsel for the Insurance company has supported the judgment of the Tribunal on this point. FAO No. 3768 of 2009 -3- I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and have also gone through the record of the case. PW-2 Sandeep Kumar son of the deceased has himself given the age of the deceased as 48 years. So, the Tribunal has rightly taken the age of the deceased as 48 years. However, the multiplier of 11 is on lower side. In view of authority reported as Smt. Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, the multiplier of 13 is to be applied for the persons in the age group of 46 to 50 years. So, by applying the multiplier of 13, the amount calculated comes to Rs.5,46,000/- (42000 X 13). So, in this manner, the amount of compensation stands enhanced by Rs.84,000/- in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Out of the said enhanced amount, Rs.50,000/- shall be paid to the widow and the remaining amount shall be paid to the remaining claimant- appellants in equal share. The enhanced amount of compensation shall also carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of appeal till payment. The liability to pay the enhanced amount shall be the same as held by the Tribunal. The appeal stands disposed of. ( K.C. Puri ) 30.3.2010 Judge chugh