F.A.O.No.168 of 2013 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.No.168 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision:
15. 01.2013.
Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Patiala ..Appellant Versus Kuneja Khatun and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr.Anupam Singla, Advocate, for the appellant.
Daya Chaudhary, J.
The present appeal has been filed by Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala against award dated 03.09.2012 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Ludhiana, vide which, respondents have been granted compensation of `7,01,200/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization of the awarded amount.
The award has been challenged on the ground that learned Tribunal has assessed income of the deceased as `150/- per day, which comes to `4500/- per month, which is on excessive side whereas no reasoning has been given.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the multiplier applied is also on higher side.
Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that learned Tribunal has ignored the statement of RW1-Kuldeep Singh, who is driver of the bus and has categorically stated that no such accident ever took place with the F.A.O.No.168 of 2013 (O&M) 2 bus owned by the appellant corporation.
Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and have also perused the impugned award.
Admittedly, the respondents are L.Rs.of deceased-Mohd.
Kabir Alam, who died in a motor vehicle accident on 01.02.2011 caused by bus bearing registration not PB-10CJ-1738.
As per finding recorded by the Tribunal, the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of bus.
The evidence of eye witness- Mohd.
Jakir Hussain that the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus has been corroborated from the contents of the FIR.
The post mortem report was also proved and cause of death was due to injuries suffered in the accident.
As per claim petition, the deceased was earning `15,000/- per month and a certificate (Ex.C3) issued by Mukhia GPR Abadpur was also placed on record.
Learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased `150/- per day, which comes to `4500/- per month.
The deceased was 32 years of age and multiplier of 16 has been applied.
The finding recorded by the tribunal is reproduced as under: - “xxx xxx xxx Issue No.3 13.
Onus to prove this issue was on the claimants.
Claimants have claimed Rs.10 Lakhs alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident till the realization of the amount of award being the legal heirs of deceased Mohd.
Kabir.
They have claimed that Mohd.
Kabir was earning Rs.15000/- per month.
However, as per certificate F.A.O.No.168 of 2013 (O&M) 3 Ex.C3 issued by Mukhia GPR Abadpur, the deceased was a labourer and was living below the poverty line.
There is no documentary evidence on record regarding the income of the deceased.
Claimant Akhatri Khatun vide her affidavit Ex.CA has stated that the deceased was working as contractor of finishing of marble at Ludhiana and was earning Rs.15000/- per month.
CW2 Mohd.
Sahib vide his affidavit Ex.CB has also deposed on the same line.
The claimants did not produce any document to prove the income of the deceased.
However their own document Ex.C3 proves that the deceased was working as labourer and was living below poverty line.
His income can thus be taken to be Rs.150/- per day.
His monthly income would be Rs.4500/- per month.
There are five family members of the deceased including himself.
1/5th amount out of his monthly income is to be deducted on account of his personal and living expenses.
The total loss of dependency of the claimants would then work out to be 4500- 900=3600/-.
The annual loss of dependency would be 3600x12=43200/-.
The claimants have stated in the claim petition that the deceased was aged 32 yeaRs.Claimant Akhtari Khatun the wife of the deceased is aged 25 yeaRs.She has stated in the affidavit Ex.CA that the deceased is aged 32 yeaRs.Similarly, CW2 Mohd.
Sahib has stated in the affidavit that the deceased was aged 32 yeaRs.As per law settled in Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 ACJ 1298.the multiplier of 16 would be applicable.
Thus the total dependency would be worked out to be 43200 x 16=6,91,200/-.
The F.A.O.No.168 of 2013 (O&M) 4 claimant Akhtari Khatun would also be entitled to sum of Rs.5000/- on account of loss of consortium.
The claimants are further entitled to another sum of Rs.5000/- as funeral expenses.
Thus the total compensation will be Rs.7,01,200/-.
All the claimants are entitled to equal share in this amount.
Respondents no.1 and 2 being the owner and driver of bus not PB010CJ-1738 are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation.
The claimants have claimed interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident till the realization of the amount of compensation.
However, in my opinion, the interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization of the award amount shall be reasonable.
This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the claimants.
xxx xxx xxx”.
Keeping in view the age of the deceased as well as multiplier and also the minimum income, the compensation awarded to the respondents cannot be stated to be on higher side.
Accordingly, there is no infirmity in the award passed by the Tribunal, which requires interference by this Court and the appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed.
15.01.2013 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE