Lachhmi Devi and Others vs Yakin Khan and Others

G.C. Garg, J.—Baldev Singh and few other persons were travelling in a truck on 3.4.1995. The truck was being driven by respondent Yakin Khan rashly and negligently and at very high speed and as a result of which it turned turtle. Baldev Singh and many others sustained multiple injuries. Baldev Singh and one Darshan Lal, however, died due to the injuries. The widow, three minor children, one sister and the father of the deceased Baldev Singh filed a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the death of said Baldev Singh.

Learned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence led before it and on a consideration of the matter, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,24,800/- as compensation to the claimants, by award dated 13.3.1997.

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and it deserves to be enhanced.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused that award. Lachhmi Devi widow of the deceased while appearing as a witness deposed that her husband Baldev Singh was engaged in the profession of dairy and poultry farming and he was earning a sum of Rs. 8,000/- per month therefrom. She further deposed, that her husband used to contribute his entire income to the family. Learned Tribunal in the absence of any evidence in that behalf did not believe the statement of the widow and ultimately on a consideration of the matter came to the conclusion that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 1,200/- per month. Learned Tribunal after applying a cut of 1/3rd, assessed the monthly dependency of the claimants on the deceased at Rs. 800/-. On a consideration of the matter, I find that the accident in the present case took place in the year 1995. During that period even a labourer could earn not less than Rs. 1,600/- per month. Learned Tribunal was thus not justified in coming to the conclusion that the deceased on the date of the accident was only earning a sum of Rs. 1,200/-per month. I thus hold that the deceased at that time must have been earning Rs. 1,600/- per month by doing the labour work. As regards the dependency, learned Tribunal has applied a cut of 1/3rd to the income of the deceased on ac- count of his personal expenses which again is not warranted in the facts of this case. The deceased left behind his widow, three minor children, besides one sister and father. In these circumstances, it cannot be expected that the deceased might have been spending one-third of his income on his personal expenses. In my opinion, a cut of 1/4th is quite just and fair on account of personal expenses of the deceased. Once this is done, the monthly dependency of the appellants comes to Rs. 1,200/- after taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 1,600/-.

Lachhmi Devi the widow of the deceased in her statement state before the Tribunal that the deceased at the time of the accident was aged 35 years. In the ration card produced in evidence, the age of the deceased was mentioned as 32 years. However, as per the postmortem report his age at that time was 39 years. Learned Tribunal having accepted the age of the deceased as 39 years, applied a multiplier of 13 which again, in opinion, is little on the lower side. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that a multiplier of 14 is quite just and fair. The amount of compensation after taking the dependency of the appellants on the deceased at Rs. 1,200/- per month and applying a multiplier of 14, would thus come to Rs. 2,01,600/-. No amount has been awarded on account of loss of love, affection and company of the deceased. The deceased left behind his aged father, sister, widow of three minor children between the age group of 5 to 9 years. In the circumstances, I award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- on account of consortium. The appellants shall therefore, be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 2,06,600/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till payment minus the amount, if any, already received. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.