Piar Bai and Others vs Kitab Singh and Others

Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.—This appeal filed on behalf of the claimants is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jind (for short ''the Tribunal''), dated 2.8.1983 for enhancement of the compensation awarded to them.

Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in this appeal are parents and Appellant Nos. 3 to 6 are the brothers and sisters of the deceased.

The learned Tribunal has held that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of truck No. HRO 5601 and as such owner of the truck as well as the driver of the truck have been held liable to pay the compensation.

The deceased was aged about 24 years on the day of accident and was unmarried; doing tailoring work. The learned Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs. 600/- from the tailoring work. The father of the deceased (since dead) was 65 years of age at the time of the death of his son. The father and mother of the deceased were held to be dependent on the deceased and their dependency was held to be only for a period of six years. The said period of six years was fixed considering the age of both parents, which was 60 years in the case of mother and 65 years in the case of father of the deceased. The brother of the deceased Prem was aged 14 years at that time, so his dependency on the deceased was also held till he became major, i.e., for a period of four years. Krishna Wanti, the sister of the deceased, was not proved to be earning anything and was aged 17 years at that time, so her dependency was held for one year. As such, the learned Tribunal was of the view that the deceased was earning Rs. 600/- per month; his contribution to the family was taken at Rs. 400/- per month and a multiplier of six was adopted. So, the total dependency of the claimants was held at Rs. 25,000/- , to be shared by claimant Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6.

During pendency of this appeal, father of the deceased, Jodha Ram, Appellant No. 2, expired on July 31, 1988 and his legal heirs have been brought on record.

I have heard the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Tribunal has held that the father and mother of the deceased can be held to be dependent on the deceased for a period of six years. To me it appears to be on lower side. The life expectancy these days has sufficiently increased. So, I hold that the dependency of the mother, who was aged about 60 years at the time of award, shall be for a period often years, as appropriate. The dependency of the brother of the deceased who was 14 years at the time of the award shall be upto 20 years, i.e., till he completes his education. The sister of the deceased, Krishna Wanti, who was aged 17 years at that time, was not earning anything. I hold that her dependency shall be for a period of three years, i.e., till she attains the age of 20 years.

I am of the view that since the deceased was earning Rs. 600/- per month, his contribution towards the family is taken at Rs. 450/- per month and a multiplier often is adopted which shall be justified and reasonable under the circumstances of the case. So, the total dependency is fixed at Rs. 54,000/- to be shared by Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6 equally. The claimant-Respondents are also allowed interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing claim petition till realisation of the amount awarded to them. The appeal is allowed in terms stated above with costs.

Counsel''s fee is assessed at Rs. 500/- .