Murti Devi and Others Vs. Sunil and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1120467
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJan-15-2014
AppellantMurti Devi and Others
RespondentSunil and Others
Excerpt:
fao no.7102 of 2010 -1- in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh fao no.7102 of 2010 date of decision: january 15, 2014. murti devi and others ...appellants versus sunil and others ...respondents coram: hon'ble mrs. justice anita chaudhry present: mr. surinder saini, advocate for the appellant. mr. t.k. joshi, advocate with mr. arun sharma, advocate for respondent no.3-insurance company. ***** anita chaudhry, j.1. the claimants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement in the compensation in the award dated 27.02.2010 passed by the motor accident claims tribunal, sonipat relating to the accident which took place on 17.07.2008 in which suresh lost his life.2. suresh, 38 years, used to work with ashoka sweets corner where he used to get a salary of rs.9,000/- per month. he also had additional income as overtime allowance of rs.5,000/- per month and a sum of rs.3,000/- per month from outdoor catering. the compensation claimed was rs.25,00,000/-.3. the respondents resisted the petition and took the usual pleas which were rejected by the tribunal. sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fao no.7102 of 2010 -2- 4. the tribunal assessed the income @ rs.5,000/- per month being a skilled labourer working at a halwai shop in a small town. it was also found that suresh was 45 years old and the multiplier of 14 was applied. the method of calculation was the unit method keeping the large family of the deceased. the claimants are the widow, her five children and the parents of the deceased.5. the contention of the appellants was that the statement of the employer and the certificate issued by him should have been taken into account and 30% increase in the income should have been given towards future prospects as explained in various judgments. an increase in the amount awarded towards loss of consortium was also sought. reliance was placed upon rajesh and others vs. rajbir singh and others 2013 (3) rcr (civil) 170. it was contended that rs.1,00,000/- should also be awarded for loss of love and affection for the children.6. the counsel for the insurance company who was arrayed as third respondent contended that the death had occurred in the year 2008 and a certificate regarding income was not sufficient to prove income and the tribunal had properly assessed the income and it was more than what a skilled labourer could have got. so far as the income is concerned, there was no evidence that the deceased was earning any extra income. the certificate was also rightly rejected by the tribunal. a certificate alone on a letter head is not sufficient to prove income.7. in view of the above, i take the income of the deceased to be rs.5,000/- per month. after adding 30% increase, the income sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fao no.7102 of 2010 -3- would come to rs.7500/- per month. considering the large family, a deduction of 1/5th is allowed towards personal expenses. the income in the hands of the family would be rs.6,000/- per month and the compensation would work out to rs.6,000/- x12= rs.72,000/- x14= rs.10,08,000/-. as per decision of the hon'ble apex court reported in rajesh and others vs. rajbir singh and others 2013 (3) rcr (civil) 170 rs.1,00,000/- is allowed for loss of consortium. the tribunal had awarded rs.5,000/- as loss of consortium, therefore, an increase of rs.95,000/- only is allowed.8. in terms of judgment in vimal kanwar and others vs. kishore dan and others 2013 (2) r.c.r.(civil) 945 rs.1,00,000/- is allowed for loss of love and affection for the children and rs.23,000/- as funeral expenses. the total amount comes to rs.12,26,000/-. the amount already allowed by the tribunal would be deducted from the above amount. the remaining amount would be paid by the third respondent-insurance company with interest at the same rate allowed by the tribunal and it shall be apportioned in the same ratio between the claimants as ordered by the tribunal. the share of the minors shall be deposited in the fixed deposit in a nationalized bank till they attain majority. the appeal is partly allowed. lower court record be sent back. (anita chaudhry) judge january 15, 2013 sunil sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

FAO No.7102 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7102 of 2010 Date of Decision: January 15, 2014. Murti Devi and others ...Appellants Versus Sunil and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY Present: Mr. Surinder Saini, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. T.K. Joshi, Advocate with Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. ***** ANITA CHAUDHRY, J.

1. The claimants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement in the compensation in the award dated 27.02.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonipat relating to the accident which took place on 17.07.2008 in which Suresh lost his life.

2. Suresh, 38 years, used to work with Ashoka Sweets Corner where he used to get a salary of Rs.9,000/- per month. He also had additional income as overtime allowance of Rs.5,000/- per month and a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month from outdoor catering. The compensation claimed was Rs.25,00,000/-.

3. The respondents resisted the petition and took the usual pleas which were rejected by the Tribunal. Sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.7102 of 2010 -2- 4. The Tribunal assessed the income @ Rs.5,000/- per month being a skilled labourer working at a Halwai shop in a small town. It was also found that Suresh was 45 years old and the multiplier of 14 was applied. The method of calculation was the unit method keeping the large family of the deceased. The claimants are the widow, her five children and the parents of the deceased.

5. The contention of the appellants was that the statement of the employer and the certificate issued by him should have been taken into account and 30% increase in the income should have been given towards future prospects as explained in various judgments. An increase in the amount awarded towards loss of consortium was also sought. Reliance was placed upon Rajesh and others Vs. Rajbir Singh and others 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 170. It was contended that Rs.1,00,000/- should also be awarded for loss of love and affection for the children.

6. The counsel for the insurance company who was arrayed as third respondent contended that the death had occurred in the year 2008 and a certificate regarding income was not sufficient to prove income and the Tribunal had properly assessed the income and it was more than what a skilled labourer could have got. So far as the income is concerned, there was no evidence that the deceased was earning any extra income. The certificate was also rightly rejected by the Tribunal. A certificate alone on a letter head is not sufficient to prove income.

7. In view of the above, I take the income of the deceased to be Rs.5,000/- per month. After adding 30% increase, the income Sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.7102 of 2010 -3- would come to Rs.7500/- per month. Considering the large family, a deduction of 1/5th is allowed towards personal expenses. The income in the hands of the family would be Rs.6,000/- per month and the compensation would work out to Rs.6,000/- X12= Rs.72,000/- X14= Rs.10,08,000/-. As per decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Rajesh and others Vs. Rajbir Singh and others 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 170 Rs.1,00,000/- is allowed for loss of consortium. The Tribunal had awarded Rs.5,000/- as loss of consortium, therefore, an increase of Rs.95,000/- only is allowed.

8. In terms of judgment in Vimal Kanwar and others Vs. Kishore Dan and others 2013 (2) R.C.R.(Civil) 945 Rs.1,00,000/- is allowed for loss of love and affection for the children and Rs.23,000/- as funeral expenses. The total amount comes to Rs.12,26,000/-. The amount already allowed by the Tribunal would be deducted from the above amount. The remaining amount would be paid by the third respondent-insurance company with interest at the same rate allowed by the Tribunal and it shall be apportioned in the same ratio between the claimants as ordered by the Tribunal. The share of the minors shall be deposited in the fixed deposit in a nationalized bank till they attain majority. The appeal is partly allowed. Lower Court record be sent back. (ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE January 15, 2013 sunil Sunil 2014.01.22 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document