F.A.O. No. 747 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 747 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.2.2010 Manga Singh and another ....Appellants Versus Sh. Janardhan and others ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. Mahesh Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. RAJESH BINDAL, J The challenge in the present appeal is to the award of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Adhoc) Fast Track Court, Ropar. Brief facts are that on 24.9.2005 at about 8:00 p.m. Mast Ram (deceased) was driving the Motor Cycle No.PB-05-B-0245 and his friend Subhash Kumar was a pillion rider. When they reached near Shivalik Vihar, Naya Gaon, in the meanwhile a Tractor Trolley bearing registration No. PB-12-F- 9531 came from the side of Naya Gaon in a rash and negligent manner at a very high speed which was being driven by appellant No. 1 and struck with the Motor Cycle as a result of which both the motor cyclists fell down on the road. Deceased received serious injuries and succumbed to the same. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the age of the deceased in the present case was claimed to be 22 years whereas the age of his parents was claimed to be 37 and 39 years at the time of filing of the claim petition on March 3, 2007, whereas the accident occurred on September 24, 2005, meaning thereby their age was about 35 and 39 years at the relevant time when the accident took place which is not possible as that would lead to the conclusion that the age of the mother at the time of birth of the deceased was merely 12-13 years. That shows that a false claim was put in by the respondents/claimants and the impugned award based thereon deserves to be set aside. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants, I do not find any merit in the submission made. No doubt the age as has been referred to by learned counsel for the appellants is so mentioned in the impugned award. However, still the fact remains that the learned Tribunal merely applied a multiplier of 10 for the purpose of assessment of compensation on account of death of Mast Ram. Even if the age of the deceased in Sarla Verma (Smt) and F.A.O. No. 747 of 2010 (O&M) 2 others Vs. Delhi Transport Corpoation and another (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, is taken in between 40 to 50 years the multiplier of 10 is to be applied. Considering the aforesaid fact, I do not find any error has been committed by the learned Court below in assessing the compensation to which a challenge could be made by the owner and driver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. However, it is made clear that this Court is not opining as such on the amount of compensation assessed as far as the stand of the claimants can be. As the deceased was claimed to be working as Assistant Manager in a Hotel and was earning a salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month, but the Court had considered his salary at Rs. 3,000/- per month and may be for certain other factors as well. (RAJESH BINDAL) 19.2.2010 JUDGE Reema