Present: Mr. Vijay Lath Advocate Vs. Tarsem Singh and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1130721
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnFeb-11-2014
AppellantPresent: Mr. Vijay Lath Advocate
RespondentTarsem Singh and Others
Excerpt:
fao no.3900 of 2005(o&m) 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh fao no.3900 of 2005(o&m) date of decision:11.02.2014 smt.usha devi alias usha kumari and others ........appellants versus tarsem singh and others ........respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice ajay tewari present: mr.vijay lath , advocate for the appellants. mr.r.n.singal, advocate for the insurance company. **** 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. to be referred to the reporters or not?. 3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. ajay tewari, j. (oral).this appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation. brief facts of the case are that on 27.11.1998 dwarka nath(since deceased) was driving truck no.pns-4188 and was returning to ganguwal tehsil anandpur sahib, district ropar after repairing water pump at ropar. pumping supervisor telu ram and conductor jasdev singh were also with him. when the truck reached within the jurisdiction of village kalyanpur, another truck bearing no.hp-12-2611 being driven by respondent no.1 in rash and negligent manner came from kiratpur sahib side and hit the truck of dwarka nath due to which dwarka nath died on the way to hospital. the tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of both the drivers in the ratio of 50:50. deceased dwarka nath was a government employee getting a gross salary of rs.8131/- per month as per salary certificate ex.c5. the tribunal deducted certain allowances nagpal sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fao no.3900 of 2005(o&m) 2 such as washing allowance, medical allowance, general allowance etc.and assessed his monthly income at rs.7500/-. 1/3rd deduction was applied and keeping in view his age i.e.51 years.multiplier of 10 was applied. in this way the compensation amount came to rs.6 lacs. besides that another sum of rs.6000/- was also awarded thereby totalling the compensation to rs.6.06 lacs since the deceased was held negligent to the extent of 50%, so the claimants were liable to get compensation of rs.3.03 lacs with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.learned counsel for the appellants has argued that after noticing that the approved income was rs.8131/-, the tribunal erred in mking a deduction of the allowances. consequently i take the salary of the deceased as rs.8100/-. as regards future prospects learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon rajesh and others v. rajbir singh and others reported as 2013(9) scc54 on the other hand learned counsel for the insurance company has relied upon reshma kumari and others v. madan mohan and another reported as 2013 air sc(civil) 1731. this point has been discussed in detail by this court in fao no.2990 of 2011, manjit kaur and others v. ramesh kumar and others decided on 08.01.2014. the deceased in the present case was 51 years of age. therefore, i grant an increase of 15 % towards future prospects. learned counsel has further argued that multiplier of 10 as per sarla verma v. dtc and another, 2009acj1298is inadequate. since the deceased was of the age of 51 years.multiplier of 11 was to be applied. i agree with the learned counsel and change the multiplier from 10 to 11. nagpal sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fao no.3900 of 2005(o&m) 3 learned counsel has argued that nothing has been awarded for the loss of consortium and loss of love and affection etc.and the amount awarded on account of funeral expenses is very low. in this regard reliance has been placed on rajesh and others vs rajbir singh and others.2013(9) scc54 and vimal kanwar and others vs kishore dan and others.(2013- 3) plr776 as regards compensation regarding loss of love and affection, counsel for the respondent-insurance company has argued that the hon'ble supreme court in rajesh and others.case (supra) granted a total amount of rs.1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow and rs.1 lac to three minor children for loss of care and guidance. counsel for the appellants, on the other hand, has contended that in vimal kanwar and others.case (supra).the hon'ble supreme court awarded a sum of rs.1 lac to the widow and a sum of rs.2 lac to the minor girl on account of loss of love and affection, and another sum of rs.1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow. consequently, i award rs.1 lac to appellant no.1 on account of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, rs.1 lac each to appellants no.3 and 4 and rs.50,000/- to appellant no.2 on account of loss of love and affection. besides that i also grant rs.10,000/- more towards funeral expenses. learned counsel for the appellants has also argued that the interest at the rate of 6% p.a.as awarded by the tribune is also on the lower side. i increase the rate of interest to 8% p.a.on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation. nagpal sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fao no.3900 of 2005(o&m) 4 apart from the individual enhancement, the enhancement would be apportioned in the same manner as per the award of the tribunal and management shall also be in the same manner as directed by the tribunal. with the above modification in the award, this appeal is allowed. (ajay tewari) judge february11, 2014 sunita nagpal sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

FAO No.3900 of 2005(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3900 of 2005(O&M) Date of Decision:11.02.2014 Smt.Usha Devi alias Usha Kumari and others ........Appellants versus Tarsem Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Vijay Lath , Advocate for the appellants.

Mr.R.N.Singal, Advocate for the insurance company.

**** 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?.

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

Ajay Tewari, J.

(Oral).This appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation.

Brief facts of the case are that on 27.11.1998 Dwarka Nath(since deceased) was driving truck No.PNS-4188 and was returning to Ganguwal Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar after repairing water pump at Ropar.

Pumping Supervisor Telu Ram and Conductor Jasdev Singh were also with him.

When the truck reached within the jurisdiction of village Kalyanpur, another truck bearing No.HP-12-2611 being driven by respondent No.1 in rash and negligent manner came from Kiratpur Sahib side and hit the truck of Dwarka Nath due to which Dwarka Nath died on the way to hospital.

The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of both the drivers in the ratio of 50:50.

Deceased Dwarka Nath was a Government employee getting a gross salary of Rs.8131/- per month as per salary certificate Ex.C5.

The Tribunal deducted certain allowances Nagpal Sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3900 of 2005(O&M) 2 such as washing allowance, medical allowance, general allowance etc.and assessed his monthly income at Rs.7500/-.

1/3rd deduction was applied and keeping in view his age i.e.51 yeaRs.multiplier of 10 was applied.

In this way the compensation amount came to Rs.6 lacs.

Besides that another sum of Rs.6000/- was also awarded thereby totalling the compensation to Rs.6.06 lacs Since the deceased was held negligent to the extent of 50%, so the claimants were liable to get compensation of Rs.3.03 lacs with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that after noticing that the approved income was Rs.8131/-, the Tribunal erred in mking a deduction of the allowances.

Consequently I take the salary of the deceased as Rs.8100/-.

As regards future prospects learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon Rajesh and others v.

Rajbir Singh and others reported as 2013(9) SCC54 On the other hand learned counsel for the insurance company has relied upon Reshma Kumari and others v.

Madan Mohan and another reported as 2013 AIR SC(Civil) 1731.

This point has been discussed in detail by this Court in FAO No.2990 of 2011, Manjit Kaur and others v.

Ramesh Kumar and others decided on 08.01.2014.

The deceased in the present case was 51 years of age.

Therefore, I grant an increase of 15 % towards future prospects.

Learned counsel has further argued that multiplier of 10 as per Sarla Verma v.

DTC and another, 2009ACJ1298is inadequate.

Since the deceased was of the age of 51 yeaRs.multiplier of 11 was to be applied.

I agree with the learned counsel and change the multiplier from 10 to 11.

Nagpal Sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3900 of 2005(O&M) 3 Learned counsel has argued that nothing has been awarded for the loss of consortium and loss of love and affection etc.and the amount awarded on account of funeral expenses is very low.

In this regard reliance has been placed on Rajesh and others vs Rajbir Singh and otheRs.2013(9) SCC54 and Vimal Kanwar and others vs Kishore Dan and otheRs.(2013- 3) PLR776 As regards compensation regarding loss of love and affection, counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh and otheRs.case (supra) granted a total amount of Rs.1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs.1 lac to three minor children for loss of care and guidance.

Counsel for the appellants, on the other hand, has contended that in Vimal Kanwar and otheRs.case (supra).the Hon'ble Supreme Court awarded a sum of Rs.1 lac to the widow and a sum of Rs.2 lac to the minor girl on account of loss of love and affection, and another sum of Rs.1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow.

Consequently, I award Rs.1 lac to appellant No.1 on account of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, Rs.1 lac each to appellants No.3 and 4 and Rs.50,000/- to appellant No.2 on account of loss of love and affection.

Besides that I also grant Rs.10,000/- more towards funeral expenses.

Learned counsel for the appellants has also argued that the interest at the rate of 6% p.a.as awarded by the Tribune is also on the lower side.

I increase the rate of interest to 8% p.a.on the amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation.

Nagpal Sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3900 of 2005(O&M) 4 Apart from the individual enhancement, the enhancement would be apportioned in the same manner as per the award of the Tribunal and management shall also be in the same manner as directed by the Tribunal.

With the above modification in the award, this appeal is allowed.

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE February11, 2014 sunita Nagpal Sunita 2014.03.04 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document