IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.1884 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision 09.09.2009 Smt.Bhanti Devi ...... Appellant VERSUS Ram Niwas and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Radhey Shyam Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for the respondent-Insurance Company. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): C.M.No.9725-CII of 2009 For the reasons, mentioned in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. F.A.O.1884 of 2009 This appeal for enhancement is directed against the award dated 23.10.2008, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fatehabad, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.2,69,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum in favour of the claimant-appellant (herein referred as 'the claimant') on account of the death of Mange Ram, aged about 50 years, in a motor vehicle accident and against the respondents jointly and severally. The respondents have neither challenged the negligence nor their liability to pay the compensation. However, in this appeal for enhancement, the only argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal has not applied the appropriate multiplier in F.A.O.1884 of 2009 (O&M) -2- this case. The Company has refuted the arguments. Heard. Age of the deceased was determined by the Tribunal as 58 years on the basis of post mortem report. It has been observed in case Smt.Sarla Verma and others appellants vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another respondents 2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77 that in case a person dies at the age of 58 years then the multiplier of 11 is the appropriate multiplier to be applied. As such, while following the guidelines issued in Sarla Verma's Case (supra), the appellant would now be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,000/- over and above the award amount. Resultantly, this appeal is partly accepted and the impugned award is modified by enhancing compensation of Rs.48,000/- over and above the award amount. However, the appellants would also be entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal. No order as to costs. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 09.09.2009 mamta-II