F.A.O.NO. 1470 OF 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 1470 OF 2008 Date of decision:10th November, 2010 Smt. Somati Devi, wife of late Bakshish Singh and others .......Appellants Versus Jarnail Singh and another ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Mahender Singh Chahal, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. R.C.Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. 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. This is an appeal for enhancement of compensation. The deceased was claimed to be 55 years of age and the claimants were widow and two sons. The claim was made under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, where the Tribunal on evidence adduced by the claimant took his monthly income at Rs. 3,200/-. It adopted a 50% deduction for personal expenses on the ground that both sons were major and therefore, they could not be said to be dependants on the F.A.O.NO. 1470 OF 2008 2 deceased. Learned counsel argues that there is no discretion left with the Tribunal as regards deduction since the formula under Schedule II is statutorily provided and there could not be any modification regarding the same. Learned counsel for the owner urges that there was no documentary proof even for taking income to be Rs. 3,200/- and therefore, it ought to be reduced further. 2. If the Tribunal has on the strength of oral evidence accepted the income to be Rs. 3,200/-, I have no better materials to either reduce or increase it. I will therefore, retain the same, also accept the contention that there is no scope for making a deduction for half when the application was pursued under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The amount could be reduced only by 1/3rd for personal expenses and so reckoned, the extent of dependence per year must be taken to be Rs. 25,600/-. As regards the choice of multiplier the post mortem certificate revealed the age of the deceased was 55 years. 3. Insurance Company, however, produced the copy of the school leaving certificate that showed that he was aged 57 years. A copy of the school leaving certificate was discussed by the Tribunal and found to be not worthy of acceptance. It found the entries relating to when he left a school to be nearly 24 years after his admission. It found it to be most unnatural that any student could have continued in a school for such a long time. With reference to the certificate, the Tribunal further found that the document was a F.A.O.NO. 1470 OF 2008 3 copy of it and it was not possible to rely on such a document. I do not find any serious error in reasoning and would go with what is stated in the post mortem certificate and take the age to be 55 years and adopt a multiplier of 11 as provided under Schedule II. The extent of dependence will therefore, be Rs. 2,81,600/-. I would add Rs. 9,500/- as going towards loss of consortium, loss to estate and funeral expenses as provided under Schedule II and take the compensation payable as Rs. 2,91,100/-. The amount of compensation shall stand increased as above and the amount in excess over what has already been awarded shall draw interest at 6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The extent of distribution amongst the representatives shall be retained as already determined by the Tribunal. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 10th November, 2010 Shivani Kaushik