Reshma And ORS v. Satish And ORS

FAO No.7489 of 2016 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7489 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.11.2019 Reshma and others .... Appellants versus Satish and others .... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Surinder Gandhi, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul The claimants are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (in short 'the Tribunal') with regard to the death of Bharat Singh in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 09.05.2014. The Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,71,000/- detailed herein as under:

Sr.

No.

Heads of claim Amount awarded Income taken per month Rs.6,000/- Deduction 1/3 towards personal living Rs.2,000/- Multiplicand(annualized) Rs.4,000 x 12 = Rs.48,000/- Multiplier Total Rs.3,36,000/- Loss of consortium Rs.50,000/- Loss of love and affection Rs.50,000/- Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/- Transport charges Rs. 10,000/- TOTAL Rs.4,71,000/- SONIA BURA 2019.12.05 12:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

FAO No.7489 of 2016 (O&M) -2Learned counsel for the claimants has challenged the award passed by the Tribunal primarily on the ground that insufficient and inadequate compensation has been awarded by the learned Tribunal by holding the income of the deceased Bharat Singh aged 65 years as Rs.6,000/- per month, which in fact should have been assessed at Rs.10,000/- per month since the deceased was a farmer having 8 acres of land from which he was earning approximately Rs.20,000/- per month. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the insurance company has submitted that compensation awarded is not only adequate but on the higher side.

After hearing submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the case file, I am of the opinion that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is in consonance with the judgment rendered in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, 2017 SCC 270. Rather I am in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various conventional heads i.e. loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, funeral expenses and transport charges is on a much higher side besides there also being no evidence to substantiate the claim that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month from cultivation. Hence, no interference is warranted in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal.

Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed.

28.11.2019 (Manjari Nehru Kaul) sonia Judge Whether speaking/non-speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2019.12.05 12:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh