SAVITA SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA CHADIGARH ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order dated 8.1.1999 whereby the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court has reversed the order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and reduced the multiplier from 11 to 8 and proportionately reduced the compensation granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal from Rs. 10,22,208 to Rs. 7,45,000. Aggrieved by this order passed by the High Court the appeal was preferred by the claimants before this court.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) We have perused the order passed by the learned single Judge. For convenient disposal of this appeal few facts may be stated that deceased Prem Chand Sharma died in motor accident and his dependants filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the Claims Tribunal after examining the matter awarded a compensation to the claimants to the tune of Rs. 10,22,208 by its award dated 24.3.1998. Aggrieved against that Union of India/Chandigarh Administration who was the owner of the offending bus preferred an appeal before the High Court. Deceased was 53 years of age at the time of accident and the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 11 for computing the compensation. The deceased was an Ayurvedic doctor and he was drawing a sum of Rs. 11,615 p.m. by way of salary at the time of death. On the basis of that though the claimants claimed higher compensation but Tribunal allowed them compensation by applying multiplier of 11. It was submitted by the appellant before the High Court that multiplier of 11 is on the higher side and it was also contended that deceased was 53 years of age who would have retired on superannuation at the age of 58 years. Therefore, it will be just and proper to apply the multiplier of 8. The High Court was persuaded and accordingly the High Court applied the multiplier of 8 and reduced the amount of compensation to Rs. 7,45,000. Hence the present appeal by claimants.