FAO No.1142 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1142 of 2010 Date of Decision. 07 .07.2010 Chief Manager/General Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Churu Depot, Dist. Churu (Raj.) (Owner/controller of Bus No.RJ-10PA/0054) ........Appellant Versus Hari Singh son of Shri Ramji Lal and others ...Respondents 2. FAO No.1143 of 2010 Chief Manager/General Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Churu Depot, Dist. Churu (Raj.) (Owner/controller of Bus No.RJ-10PA/0054) ........Appellant Versus Smt. Santosh Devi @ Lali Bai widow of Rakesh Kumar S/o Sh.Hari Singh and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Anil K. Gahlawat, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.K. Yadav, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J. 1. The appeals are filed by the Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation challenging the awards of compensation for damage to the vehicle owned by the claimant and against the award of compensation for the legal representatives of a FAO No.1142 of 2010 -2- deceased passenger in the private car in its collision with the bus belonging to the appellant-Corporation. The Tribunal found that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Corporation and fixed the liability on the appellant. 2. While determining the claim for damage to the car, the Tribunal found that the value of the Indica Car was Rs.3,11,611/- at the time of purchase and after working out of depreciation of 60% and relying on the evidence of a motor mechanic (PW-6) had ascertained the value of the vehicle to be at Rs.1,86,700/-. 3. As regards the claim on behalf of the legal representatives of the deceased, the Tribunal relied on the salary certificate produced on behalf of the claimants to see that he had a basic pay of Rs.11,020/- + Rs.4600/- Grade Pay, he was earning Rs.17,157/- per month at the time of his death. Relying on the decision of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, the Tribunal provided 1/4th of his income as going for personal expenses and took the extent of dependency as 3/4th of his income. Taking note of the fact that the deceased was a permanent employee in Haryana Government and the salary after the 6th Pay Commission provided that for a man, who was aged 37 years, for future prospects of promotion, 50% of the monthly income must be added for future prospects. Therefore, the total income of the deceased was taken to be Rs.25,690/-. The Tribunal applied a multiplier of 15 and the compensation was determined as Rs.34,68,150/- besides Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium. 4. The appellant contends that the accident was not due to FAO No.1142 of 2010 -3- only rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus and it was a case of collision where the driver of the car must have been held responsible for the accident. The Tribunal has relied on the facts detailed in the FIR as well as the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2, who had deposed that the 1st respondent was guilty of rash and negligent driving. It also took note of the fact that the police had challaned the driver of the bus only. The appellant has not placed on record any evidence of witnesses given on the side of the respondent to point out that any aspect of important evidence produced by the respondent was discarded. Nor has the appellant produced any material before me to discredit the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2. The finding of the Tribunal, therefore, that the appellant-driver was alone responsible for the accident and cast the liability only on the appellant cannot be assailed. 5. As regards the contention raised in FAO No.1142 of 2010, the same has been done on appropriate appreciation of the motor mechanic. The consideration of the value of the car at the time of purchase and the depreciation worked upto the date of award to be arrived at Rs.1,86,700/-, I do not find any defect in the manner of assessment to interfere in appeal. FAO No.1142 of 2010 is consequently dismissed. 6. As regards the assessment of compensation for the death, the provision for promotional prospects and future increments to a government employee cannot be denied. The Tribunal has applied the choice of multiplier and the mode of assessment of arriving at the extent of dependence and the multiplicand as obtained through FAO No.1142 of 2010 -4- taking the actual monthly salary and providing for a 50% increase, has arrived at a sum of Rs.25,690/-. The amount of compensation that comes to is Rs.34,68,150/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses and provided for a loss of consortium as Rs.10,000/-. In all, a total sum of Rs.34,88,150/- has been arrived at. The Tribunal has directed that the 25% of the amount shall be paid to the claimants No.1, 4 and 5, who are adults and the balance of amount has been directed to be deposited in Fds in nationalized bank. The assessment of compensation made by the Tribunal accords with law in every aspect and there is no scope for interference in appeal. 7. The appeal in FAO No.1143 of 2010 is also dismissed. No costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE July 07, 2010 Pankaj*