Achint Preet Singh and Another vs Gurdip Singh and Others

Nawab Singh, J.—This claimants'' appeal is directed against the Award dated April 5th, 2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal"), Patiala whereby it awarded an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- as compensation to the appellants on account of death of their mother Devinder Kaur, aged 45 years, who died in a road accident on January 21st, 2005. It was pleaded that on January 21st, 2005 Devinder Kaur was travelling in a bus bearing No. PB-11-Q-8837 driven by Gurdip Singh. The bus was owned by Mohinder Singh and was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company. It was further pleaded that Devinder Kaur was working as a Principal in a school in the name and style Achint Public School, Patiala and drawing salary of Rs. 5500/- per month. The deceased was getting pension of Rs. 4500/- per month and earning Rs. 3000/- by doing tuition work. It was also averred that the claimants were aged 18 and 16 years. Their father had already died.

Driver and owner of the offending bus did not appear to contest before the Tribunal although, driver of the bus appeared as a witness to depose that the accident did not occur on account of his negligence.

The Oriental Insurance Company filed written-statement denying the allegations made in the claim application.

On the contest of the parties, following issues were framed:--

Whether Devinder Kaur died in a motor accident due to rash and negligent driving of Bus No. PB-11-Q-8837 by its driver respondent No. 1 Gurdip Singh on 21.1.2005 in the area of PS Civil Lines, Patiala? OPA

Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation. If so, to what amount and from whom? OPA

Whether the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Respondent No. 1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. If so, its effect? OPR-3.

Relief.

Issue No. 1 was decided in favour of the claimants holding that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus by respondent No. 1. Under issue No. 2, the claimants were held entitled to compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/-. Issue No. 3 was decided against the respondents.

Learned counsel for the appellants has challenged the Award of the Tribunal only on the short ground that considering the age of the deceased to be 45 years, the Tribunal applied multiplier of 10 whereas it should have been 14 as per the judgment delivered by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, .

When the question is what should be the quantum of compensation and how it should be computed in a case of death in a motor accident case, the oft-quoted Sarla Verma''s case (supra) provided the guidelines and has been followed by this and other Courts of the country. The whole gamut of the matter has since been considered by a 3-Judge Bench of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Reshma Kumari and Others Vs. Madan Mohan and Another, The matter was gone into threadbare and conclusion drawn to settle the controversies.

Dispute in the case in hand relates to the computation of compensation for death of Devinder Kaur. She was 45 years old at the time of accident. She was drawing salary of Rs. 5500/- per month as proved by Nahar Singh Clerk, Achint Public School, Rajgarh (PW-1) so, it is unequivocally held that the deceased was 45 years and was drawing salary of Rs. 5500/- per month. The Tribunal held the age of the deceased to be 45 years and her income at Rs. 5500/-. It deducted 1/3rd for her personal and living expenses and as such the monthly dependency of the claimants was assessed at Rs. 3700/-. The Tribunal applied multiplier of 10 and calculated the amount as Rs. 3700 x 12 x 10 = 4,40,000/-. An amount of Rs. 6000/- was also awarded for expenses on last rites of the deceased and as such, compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization was awarded.

Since the age of the deceased was 45 years, multiplier of 14 should have been applied by the Tribunal as held in Sarla Verma''s case (supra) and Reshma Kumari''s case (supra) which has been approved and reiterated. It has been authoritatively held that the principles laid down in Sarla Verma''s case (supra) be followed. Applying the said principles in this case in which Devinder Kaur was 45 years old and working as Principal in the school and drawing income of Rs. 5500/- per month. Deducting 1/3rd for her personal and living expenses, the compensation has to be assessed like 5500-1/3rd = 3700 x 12 x 14 = Rs. 6,21,600/- plus Rs. 6000/- as awarded by the Tribunal for last rites. In view of above, the Award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellants are held entitled to total compensation of Rs. 6,27,600/-, that is, Rs. 1,77,600/- over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. The interest on the enhanced amount of Rs. 1,77,600/-- shall be paid from the date of filing claim application till the amount was deposited by the insurance company under the impugned Award at the same rate of interest as was awarded by the Tribunal. The amount of enhanced compensation shall be deposited by the insurance company before the Tribunal on or before October 1st, 2013.