AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Kannan J.—The appeal is against an award of dismissal of the claim in a case where the deceased, who was a Mason aged 39 years, was run over by the Respondent''s bus. The fact of accident was admitted by the driver and the owner but contended that the accident had taken place only by the negligence of the cyclist. As regards the evidence by the Sarpanch Harjeet Singh, who spoke about the accident, the Court found that the negligence was established since the evidence of the eye-witness was unreliable. The further reasoning was that Harjeet Singh himself was not stated to be an eye-witness in the petition and therefore, the evidence could not be relied on. In the case of a collision between the motor cyclist and the cyclist, who were travelling on the road, I would place the issue of negligence to be established by the fact of death of the cyclist himself, for there ought to be a greater degree of care by the driver of the motor cycle. I will, therefore, set aside the finding of the Tribunal that the claimants had not established the issue of negligence. I would hold on the other hand that the driver of the motor cycle was responsible for the accident.
The deceased was a Mason and the evidence through AW-2, who was also a Mason, was that the deceased used to be earning Rs. 100/-per day. The Tribunal took the average income at Rs. 2800/-, made a deduction of 1/3rd and adopted a multiplier of 16 but chose to dismiss the claim petition on the ground that the negligence was not established. The counsel seeks for appraisal of compensation in the manner laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, . I will take the income as taken by the Tribunal and re-work the compensation as per the formula given in the said decision. The total compensation is tabulated as under:
FATAL ACCIDENTS
Age
39years
Occupation
Mason
Claimants
Widow, 3 minor daughters and two minor sons
Heads of claim
Tribunal
High Court
Sl. No.
Amount (Rs.)
Amount (Rs.)
1
Income
2800
2800
2
Add, % of increase 30% / 50%
3
Average monthly income x 12
4
Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5)
1/3rd
1/4th
FATAL ACCIDENTS
5
Multiplicand
2100
6
Multiplier
16
15
7
Loss of dependence
1,24,800
378000
8
Medical Expenses & Transportation
9
Loss of Consortium
17500
10
Loss to estate
5200
2500
11
Funeral expenses
2000
Total
1,30,000
4,00,000
The amount determined now shall also bear interest @7.5% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The liability shall be against the Respondents jointly and severally and the insurance company shall be liable to indemnify the insured. The amount shall be distributed equally amongst the widow and the children.
The appeal is allowed to the above extent.