Parwati and ors. Vs. Billu Alias Bijender and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1062995
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-11-2013
AppellantParwati and ors.
RespondentBillu Alias Bijender and ors.
Excerpt:
fao no.5278 o”1. in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh fao no.5278 of 2011 date of order:11. 07.2013 parwati and ors....appellants versus billu alias bijender and ors...respondents -- coram: hon'ble mr.justice vijender singh malik present: mr.amit shivrain, advocate for the appellants. none for respondents no.1 and 2. mr.aseem aggarwal, advocate for respondent no.3. *** vijender singh malik, j. this is an appeal brought by the claimants, parwati and six others against the award dated 25.03.2011 passed by learned motor accidents claims tribunal, rohtak (for short 'the kumar dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court,chandigarh fao no.5278 o”2. tribunal').the claim petition had been brought under section 166 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (for short 'the act') on the death of ram udgar singh in a road side accident that took place on 14.05.2009. learned tribunal has awarded a sum of rs.12,57,000/- as compensation to the claimants. since the short point raised in this appeal is regarding the income of the deceased on the basis of which compensation was calculated, it is just necessary to mention the following facts. on 14.05.2009 at about 6.30 pm ram udgar singh was travelling in a jeep bearing registration not hr-61/0720 and when it was in the area of village kharawar, a truck bearing registration not hr-63/0738 driven in a rash and negligent manner had hit the said jeep, on account of which some of the occupants of the jeep including ram udgar singh died. ram udgar singh was b.sc. engineering in metallurgy and was working with m/s mohindra fastners private limited and was earning rs.37,250/- per month. at the time of his death, he was 49 years old, as his date of birth has been 10.09.1959. the aforesaid averments of the claimants were denied by the respondents. kumar dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court,chandigarh fao no.5278 o”3. learned counsel for the appellants has contended that although vivek, pw-3 is a time office supervisor of m/s mohindra fastners private limited, who has produced on record salary slips of the deceased for the months of april and may 2009 showing his salary as rs.37,250/- yet learned tribunal did not take into consideration the said documents and has arbitrarily taken the income of the deceased at rs.10,000/- per month. according to him, learned tribunal did not even take into consideration any addition to the aforesaid income, which is due in this case on account of future prospects. learned counsel for respondent no.3 has submitted, on the other hand, that the documents ex.p-10 and p-11, the salary slips produced by vivek, pw-3 appear to be manipulated documents. according to him, there could not be the salary of the deceased for the month of may to be paid in the sum of rs.37,250/- because on 14.05.2009 the accident took place and he died on the next day and the salary for the full month as shown paid in the documents would show that the same are manipulated. he has further submitted that learned tribunal has, thus, rightly taken the income of the deceased at rs.10,000/- per month. kumar dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court,chandigarh fao no.5278 o”4. it is true that ram udgar singh died in the month of may 2009. he met with the accident on 14.05.2009 and died on the next day and so he could not get the full month salary of may 2009. this clearly shows that the documents are manipulated one. however, even if the salary of the deceased was taken as rs.10,000/- and he was of the age of 49 years.then 30% increase should have been taken in the name of future prospects. taking into account the fact that the deceased was b.sc. engineering in metallurgy and he was expected to earn more than rs.10,000/- per month as also the future prospects, i take the income of the deceased at the time of his death at rs.15,000/- per month. since the dependents of the deceased have been seven in number, the deduction of 1/5th is to be made from this income towards the personal expenditure of the deceased on himself. the monthly dependency of the claimants, thus, comes to rs.12,000/- and the annual dependency comes to rs.1,44,000/-. there is no dispute regarding the multiplier adopted by learned tribunal in this case. so multiplying the annual dependency with 13, the multiplier as selected by the tribunal, i find a sum of rs.18,72,000/- as the amount lost by the claimants on the death of kumar dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court,chandigarh fao no.5278 o”5. ram udgar singh. adding to it, a sum of rs.10,000/- as compensation in the name of loss of estate, funeral expenses etc., i find a sum of rs.18,82,000/- as compensation payable to the appellants. in this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed enhancing compensation payable to the appellants from rs.12,57,000/- to rs.18,82,000/-, which shall be payable with interest and in the proportion given by the tribunal. (vijender singh malik) judge 11 07.2013 dinesh kumar dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court,chandigarh
Judgment:

FAO No.5278 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.5278 of 2011 Date of order:

11. 07.2013 Parwati and ors....Appellants Versus Billu alias Bijender and ors...Respondents -- CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr.Amit Shivrain, Advocate for the appellants.

None for respondents no.1 and 2.

Mr.Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent no.3.

*** Vijender Singh Malik, J.

This is an appeal brought by the claimants, Parwati and six others against the award dated 25.03.2011 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (for short 'the Kumar Dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh FAO No.5278 o”

2. Tribunal').The claim petition had been brought under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') on the death of Ram Udgar Singh in a road side accident that took place on 14.05.2009.

Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.12,57,000/- as compensation to the claimants.

Since the short point raised in this appeal is regarding the income of the deceased on the basis of which compensation was calculated, it is just necessary to mention the following facts.

On 14.05.2009 at about 6.30 PM Ram Udgar Singh was travelling in a Jeep bearing registration not HR-61/0720 and when it was in the area of village Kharawar, a truck bearing registration not HR-63/0738 driven in a rash and negligent manner had hit the said jeep, on account of which some of the occupants of the jeep including Ram Udgar Singh died.

Ram Udgar Singh was B.Sc.

Engineering in Metallurgy and was working with M/s Mohindra Fastners Private Limited and was earning Rs.37,250/- per month.

At the time of his death, he was 49 years old, as his date of birth has been 10.09.1959.

The aforesaid averments of the claimants were denied by the respondents.

Kumar Dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh FAO No.5278 o”

3. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that although Vivek, PW-3 is a Time Office Supervisor of M/s Mohindra Fastners Private Limited, who has produced on record salary slips of the deceased for the months of April and May 2009 showing his salary as Rs.37,250/- yet learned Tribunal did not take into consideration the said documents and has arbitrarily taken the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month.

According to him, learned Tribunal did not even take into consideration any addition to the aforesaid income, which is due in this case on account of future prospects.

Learned counsel for respondent no.3 has submitted, on the other hand, that the documents Ex.P-10 and P-11, the salary slips produced by Vivek, PW-3 appear to be manipulated documents.

According to him, there could not be the salary of the deceased for the month of May to be paid in the sum of Rs.37,250/- because on 14.05.2009 the accident took place and he died on the next day and the salary for the full month as shown paid in the documents would show that the same are manipulated.

He has further submitted that learned Tribunal has, thus, rightly taken the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month.

Kumar Dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh FAO No.5278 o”

4. It is true that Ram Udgar Singh died in the month of May 2009.

He met with the accident on 14.05.2009 and died on the next day and so he could not get the full month salary of May 2009.

This clearly shows that the documents are manipulated one.

However, even if the salary of the deceased was taken as Rs.10,000/- and he was of the age of 49 yeaRs.then 30% increase should have been taken in the name of future prospects.

Taking into account the fact that the deceased was B.Sc.

Engineering in Metallurgy and he was expected to earn more than Rs.10,000/- per month as also the future prospects, I take the income of the deceased at the time of his death at Rs.15,000/- per month.

Since the dependents of the deceased have been seven in number, the deduction of 1/5th is to be made from this income towards the personal expenditure of the deceased on himself.

The monthly dependency of the claimants, thus, comes to Rs.12,000/- and the annual dependency comes to Rs.1,44,000/-.

There is no dispute regarding the multiplier adopted by learned Tribunal in this case.

So multiplying the annual dependency with 13, the multiplier as selected by the Tribunal, I find a sum of Rs.18,72,000/- as the amount lost by the claimants on the death of Kumar Dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh FAO No.5278 o”

5. Ram Udgar Singh.

Adding to it, a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation in the name of loss of estate, funeral expenses etc., I find a sum of Rs.18,82,000/- as compensation payable to the appellants.

In this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed enhancing compensation payable to the appellants from Rs.12,57,000/- to Rs.18,82,000/-, which shall be payable with interest and in the proportion given by the Tribunal.

(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 11 07.2013 dinesh Kumar Dinesh 2013.07.17 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh