Bachhni Devi vs Waizu Rehaman

G.C. Garg, J.—Hans Pal son of the appellant died in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 8.4.1990 between a car in which the deceased was travelling and the offending truck driven by respondent No. 1. On a claim petition filed by the mother and the father of the deceased, who was aged 21 years at the time of the accident, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Yamunanagar at Jagadhari vide its award dated 7.10.1992, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation by assessing the annual dependency of the appellants on the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- P.A. and after applying a multiplier of 16. Though the exact amount of compensation calculated at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month i.e. Rs. 6000/- per year by applying the multiplier of 16, comes to Rs. 96,000/- but the learned Tribunal rounded of the said amount to rupees one lac.

The, appellants filed this appeal against the award of the learned Tribunal seeking enhancement of the compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that Hans Pal, the victim of the fatal accident, was holder of I.T.I. Certificate in the Trade of Wireman. He was also having license for issuing test reports for new electric connections and by doing this job, he was also earning a handsome amount besides his salary which he was receiving from employment in the Haryana State Electricity Board. Learned counsel however, further submitted that in any case the Tribunal has, concluded that Hans Pal would soon have been earning Rs. 1,000/- to 1,500/- per month which in the years to come would have further increased. Learned counsel also submitted that even if it be taken the deceased was earning Rs. 1,500/- per month by way of his employment and by doing the private technical job, the dependency at Rs. 500/- per month as determined by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and thus the amount of compensation deserves to be enhanced. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company on the other hand submitted that learned Tribunal has rightly determined the dependency of the appellants on the deceased at Rs. 500/- and no enhancement in the amount of compensation is called for.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order of the learned Tribunal. There is no dispute in this appeal is regarding income of the deceased which he might have been earning at the time of his death and regarding dependency of the appellants on him. It has come in evidence led on behalf of the claimant-appellants that their son Hans Pal was a technical man being I.T.I Certificate holder in the Trade of Wireman. He had also a licence for issuing test reports of private electric connection. It is a matter of common knowledge that normally a technical man earns some amount by doing private and part time job in addition to his job which he is otherwise doing by way of regular employment. This is not in dispute that Hans Pal was employed an apprentice in H.S.E.B. and was receiving some amount. Though the father of Hans Pal deceased, who is one of the appellants herein, While appearing in the witness box stated that Hans Pal was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month and out of which he was contributing a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the family, yet having regard to the fact that the deceased was a young man of 21 years and was a technical man, it can be expected that he must have been earning at least a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per month. Once it is concluded, it can further be concluded that he must be contributing a sum of Rs. 650/- per month to his parents at the time of his death and must have contributed this much amount in the years to come as his income was also likely to increase further with the passage of time as he was a technical man. Learned. Tribunal was thus not right in determining the dependency of the appellants on Hans Pal at Rs. 500/- per month. The amount of compensation now calculated at the rate of Rs. 650/- i.e. Rs. 7,800/- per year, by applying the multiplier of 16, would come to Rs. 1,24,800/-. The amount of compensation is thus enhanced accordingly. The award of the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Appellants shall also be entitled to interest on this amount as per the Tribunal''s order.