Smt. Thuro Devi and others vs The National Insurance Company Limited, Jullundur and others

S.S. Sodhi, J.—The claim in appeal here is for enhanced compensation. The claimants being the mother, widow and children of Chuni Lal doceased, who was killed when the bus PBA-6675 came from behind and hit into his cycle. This happened on 3rd January, 1981, on the Gurdaspur-Pathankot road The finding of the Tribunal being that the accident had been caused entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. A sum of Rs. 19,516/- was awarded as compensation to the claimants.

Chuni Lal deceased was about 54 years of age at the time of his death He was working as Agricultural Sub-Inspector in the office of the Chief Agricultural Officer, Gurdaspur His total emoluments were over Rs.950/- per month and he was due to retire on 30th Sepetember, 1984.

The evidence on record shows that Chuni Lal deceased died leaving behind hit widowed mother, his widow Thuro Devi, four sons and three daughters Except for one son Ram Sarup, who was employed in a Bank, all the others were dependent upon him. Three of the sons had yet to be settled One of them was still studying in school. There were two unmarried daughters, both miners, studying in school Considering his liabilities, namely, the number of persons dependent upon him and the fact that his children were still unsettled and three of them had not yet completed their schooling, there is every reason to assume that be would have looked for some gainful employment to supplement his pension after his retirement from service Indeed, he would have been compelled to do so The possibility of Chuni Lal having found such employment after retirement cannot be said to have been remote particularly in the agricultrual sector where his talents lay. These are indeed pertinent and important considerations in taking an overall view of the circumstances of the deceased, particularly his earnings till retirement and his estimated emoluments on. re-employment thereafter in the context of the needs and the situation of the claimants keeping in view generally the principles laid down by the Full Bench in Lachhman Singh v. Gurmit Kaur (1979) 81 P. L. R. 1, in so far as they are relevant here, the dependency deserves to be taken at Rs. 500/- per month with a multiplier of 10. So computed, the compensation payable would work out to Rs. 60,006/- (rupees sixty thousand).

Mr. Maharaj Bakhsh Singh, counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company sought to press in aid the judgment of this Court in F.A O No 361 of 1981 (Smt. Laxmi Devi v Om Raj Singh F.A.O. 361 of 1981.) decided on 29th April. 19S5, with a view to contend that the compensation awarded was just and reasonable The deceased in that case was a 62 years old retired Naib Tehsildar The award of Rs 4,000/-as compensation to his widow and children was upheld with the finding that the counsel for the claimant could not point to any loss arising from his death other than the pension which was being paid to him during his lifetime. This pension was Rs 400/- per month and the family pension being paid to his widow after his death was of an equal amount. Pension payable to the deceased could not thus be considered as any loss to the claimants On the face of it, this case bears no resemblance to the present case and cannot thus be taken to be a relevant precedent to deny enhanced compensation to the claimants.

The compensation payable to the claimants is accordingly hereby enhanced to Rs. 60,000/-, which they shall be entitled to along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application to the date of payment of the amount awarded. Out of the amount awarded, a sum of Rs 30,000/ shall be paid to the widow of the deceased and the balance to the other appellant-claimants in equal shares The amount payable to the minor claimants shall be paid to them in such manner as the Tribunal may deem to be in their best interest Respondents 1, 2 and 3 shall be jointly and severally liable for the compensation awarded. The liability of the respondent-Insurance Company shall, however, be limited to Rs. 50,000/-

This appeal it accordingly hereby accepted with costs. Counsel''s fee Rs. 500/-.