Satish Kumar Garg And Others vs Nar Bahadur And Others

Alok Singh, J

Present appeal is filed by the claimants / appellants for enhancement challenging the judgment and order dated 3.08.2010 passed by MACT, Dehradun in MACP No. 61 of 2007.

Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that on 30.01.2007, deceased Mohit was going on a scooter bearing registration no. UA 07 H 3308. He was pillion rider while Varun Agarwal was driving the scooter. When they reached Hotel Pacific, Subhash Road, then one Ambassador Car bearing registration no. UA 07 H 1644 hit the scooter. In the accident, Varun Agarwal and Mohit received grievous injuries. Mohit was taken to the PGI, Chandigarh where he was declared. Parents and sister of deceased Mohit filed claim petition. Tribunal allowed the petition partly. Feeling aggrieved, claimants - appellants approached this Court.

Heard Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate for the appellants and Mr. K.K. Shah, Advocate for respondent no. 3 and perused the record. None appeared on behalf of respondent no. 2 despite sufficient service.

Mr. M. K. Goyal, Advocate for the appellants has challenged the judgment of the Tribunal on the following counts: first, Tribunal has failed to consider the monthly income of Mohit as Rs. 14500/- per month; second Tribunal has applied wrong multiplier and third, Tribunal has awarded fewer amounts towards funeral expenses and no amount awarded for loss of estate.

Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate for the appellants has submitted that they had annexed the appointment letter, payment voucher and certificate issued by SMS Enterprises where Mohit was working in order to substantiate the monthly salary of Mohit as Rs. 14500 per month.

I have perused the appointment letter, payment voucher and certificate issued by SMS Enterprises. In the appointment letter only date is mentioned no letter number is mentioned. In payment voucher only, amount of Rs. 14,500/- no classification is made viz. basic salary and allowance etc. No document of SMS Enterprises was produced in order to show that they had any record of payment. In certificate, no date and letter number was mentioned. Therefore, in my view, the Tribunal has rightly computed the compensation on the basis of notional income.

So far as multiplier is concerned, I am of view that since deceased was aged about 18 years, therefore, Tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 13. In view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, the multiplier should be of 18.

So far as amount towards funeral charges is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5000/- only. The Tribunal has also failed to award any amount towards loss of estate. Though loss of estate cannot be compensated by any amount of money but in order to harmonize the bereaved family, the Court directs for payment of some compensation. In view of observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), I am of the view that appellants are entitled for Rs. 15000 towards funeral charges and Rs. 15000 towards loss of estate.

In the present case, since income of the deceased is not proved, therefore, Tribunal was right in assessing the notional income of deceased as Rs. 3000/-. Deceased was bachelor, after deducting ½ from his income, his income comes to Rs. 1500/- per month. Annual income of deceased would come to Rs. 1500 x 12 = 18,000/-. Now, by applying the multiplier of 18, compensation would come to Rs. 3,24,000/-. Adding Rs. 15000/- and Rs. 15000/- towards funeral expenses and loss of estate respectively, the total compensation would come to Rs. 3,54,000/-.

Accordingly, respondent no. 2 is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,54,000/- along with interest @ 9 per annum to the appellants / claimants from the date of filing of petition before the MACT concerned, within two month from date of production of certified copy of this judgment. Judgment passed by the MACT is modified to the above extent.

Present appeal is allowed in above terms. No order as to costs.