FAO No.7129 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7129 of 2010 in MACT Petition No.6 of 2009 Date of Decision : 02.12.2011 Smt. Sunita and others .......Appellants Versus Joginder and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Rajesh Sheoran, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. R.S. Dhull, Advocate, for the respondent-Insurance Company. **** JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL) The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant- appellants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani vide impugned Award dated 12.5.2010. Brief facts of the case in hand are that on 03.08.2008, Naresh Kumar, since deceased, along with his wife, Sunita, and daughter, Pooja, were going to Village Bhaini Jattan, District Bhiwani, on a motorcycle bearing No.HR-26M-2436. At about 12.30 1 FAO No.7129 of 2010 p.m., when they reached at Sorkhi turning point, a Dumper bearing No.HR46B/8312, (hereinafter as the offending dumper), being driven by the driver, respondent No.1, rashly and negligently, came from the opposite side and hit against the motorcycle. As a result of the accident, all the occupants of the motorcycle fell down and sustained injuries. Naresh Kumar, the deceased, succumbed to his injuries at the spot. FIR No.154 dated 3.8.2008, was registered against the driver, respondent No.1, at PS Bawanikhera. In this background, two separate claim petitions were filed, viz., MACT No.5 of 2009, on account of the injuries sustained by the injured-claimant, Sunita, and MACT No.6 of 2009, on account of the death of Naresh Kumar, which were decided by the common impugned Award. The present appeal has been preferred assailing the findings recorded qua MACT No.6 of 2009, seeking enhancement. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The age of the deceased as reflected in the Post Mortem Report, Ex.P2, is 37 years. His monthly income has been assessed at `4,500/- per month. The claimant-appellants are wife, three minor children, and old parents, total being six in number. The learned Tribunal has applied the deduction on account of personal expenses of the deceased as 1/3rd. However, keeping in view the number of claimants, which is six in the instant case, the deduction should have been to the extent of 1/4th, as has been laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77. It is held 2 FAO No.7129 of 2010 accordingly. Thus, the dependency of the claimants comes to `3,375/- per month. The learned Tribunal has further erred in applying the multiplier of 13 in the present case. The deceased was 37 years of age at the time of his death in the accident. Therefore, keeping in view of the law laid down in Sarla Verma’s case (supra), the correct multiplier to be applied is 15. In view of the above discussion, the claimant-appellants are held entitled to an amount of ` 6,07,500/- (`3,375/- X 12 X 15) against the head ‘dependency’ as against the amount of `4,68,000/-. A consolidated amount of `20,000/- is awarded under all conventional heads. Accordingly, the claimant-appellants shall be entitled to an amount of `1,49,500/- (Say `1,50,000/-) as enhanced compensation, which shall be payable to them within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, failing which, they shall also be entitled to the interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the present appeal, till its realization The present appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award dated 12.5.2010 is modified to the extent indicated above. ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) 02.12.2011 JUDGE atulsethi Note: Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No 3