Smt. Santosh and Others vs Devender and Others

Vijender Singh Malik, J.—This is claimants'' appeal for enhancement of compensation. Ram Singh and others claimed themselves to be dependents of Baljeet Singh and had brought a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ''the Act''). Learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat (for short ''the Tribunal'') vide award dated 29.01.2009 has allowed the claim petition and has awarded Rs. 4,14,000/- as compensation in favour of the claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization thereof. Baljeet Singh was 30 years of age and was doing agricultural work. He was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. A sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- is claimed as compensation by his parents, widow and minor children.

The aforesaid averments were denied by the respondents. They have denied their liability to pay compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the income of the deceased is taken by the Tribunal at Rs. 3000/- per month. According to him, even an unskilled labourer earns much more than the amount assessed by the Tribunal in the name of income of the deceased. He has further submitted that the deceased was an agriculturist by profession and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. He has further submitted that the dependency of the claimants was also not to be assessed by applying a cut of 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased on himself. He has further submitted that the claimants have been six in number and the dependency should have been assessed after applying deduction of 1/4th from the same. He had, however, no quarrel with the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal at 17.

learned counsel for respondent no. 3 has submitted, on the other hand, that the income of the deceased has been rightly taken by the Tribunal and compensation has been properly assessed. It is further submitted that no enhancement is due in this case to the compensation assessed by the tribunal on account of death of Baljeet Singh.

A person, who is claimed to be an agriculturist by profession cannot be taken to be an unskilled labourer. Even an unskilled labourer would have been earning more than Rs. 3000/- per month on 10.06.2007, the date of accident. Therefore, I take the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4000/-.

It is a case where the dependent family members of the deceased have been six. As laid down in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, the dependency has to be assessed in such a case by taking the deduction at 1/4th. Thus, deducting 1/4th from Rs. 4000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased on himself, I find a sum of Rs. 3000/- as the monthly dependency of the claimants, which comes to Rs. 36,000/- as annual dependency on multiplication of the same by 12. Multiplying the annual dependency with 17, the multiplier selected by the Tribunal, I find the claimants to have lost Rs. 6,12,000/- in the death of Baljeet Singh. Adding to it, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation for loss of consortium and expenses on last rites and transportation of dead body, I assess a sum of Rs. 6,27,000/- as compensation. Consequently, the appeal succeeds and is allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs. 4,14,000/- to Rs. 6,27,000/-, which shall be payable to the appellants in the proportion and with interest at the rate as given by the Tribunal.