SUNEHRI WIDOW AND ANOTHER Vs. BINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is for enhancement of claim of compensation for death of male aged 18/19 years, who is a student of 10+2. The claimants were mother aged 49 years and unmarried sister aged 23 years. The father had already expired. After the accident on 08.05.2008 the deceased had been admitted and was treated at Sarvodaya Multispeciality Hospital, Hisar, from where later he was admitted to Fortis Hospital where he died on 22.05.2008. The claimants have brought on record medical bills totalling Rs. 2,06,216/- and the Court while fixing compensation added Rs. 15,000/- towards attendant and special diet. As regards the assessment to loss of dependency, the Tribunal assessed the loss of income notionally at Rs.15000/- per annum and proceeded to determine a compensation of Rs. 4,86,216/- that included Rs.50000/- as damages for pain and suffering.

(2.) In my view the assessment of compensation is not correct. The Tribunal while deciding the case has made a reference to judgment of the Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others, 2001 8 SCC 197 where the Court was assessing compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs and found the person to secure a compensation in Tisco as relevant. The Court was in that case determining a compensation of Rs.3,60,000/-. We have also a decision in M.S. Grewal Vs. Deep Chand Sood, 2001 8 SCC 151 where the Court was assessing a compensation of Rs.5 lakhs for death of school students and assumed that the relative high economic and social status itself would allow for the Court to make an inference that the deceased students could have moved up fairly high and would have contributed fairly a large sum. Schedule II itself prescribes a family, where if the income of the deceased was less than Rs. 40000/- the scales of compensation would be to allow for a multiplier dependent on the age of the person and take the notional income to be Rs. 15000/-. All this is only to state that there is no particular uniform principle applicable in cases of death of persons who were not yet employed. It has to depend on the evidence relating to the social and economic status of the claimants and of the deceased.

(3.) In this case it is contended that the claimants belong to an agricultural family in a typical situation where the father had also died the son would have definitely supported his mother and unmarried sister. I would assume that he would have contributed at least Rs. 3000/- per month as a contribution to the family and the appropriate multiplier must be made to depend on the age of the parent would have been a dependent. Sister's dependence ought to be for a lesser number of year till she was married. However, there ought to be an appropriate provision for the contribution which the brother could have made in the absence of father for the marriage expenses. Taking the age of the mother as relevant for determination of the multiplier I will take the appropriate multiplier to be 13 and find the loss of dependence at Rs. 4,68,000/-. I will also add Rs. 10000/- for loss of love and affection for the mother for the death of his son and retain Rs. 10000/- as awarded by the Court below for transportation. The Court has also provided for the medical expenses for dead etc. upto the date of death of his son as has been already provided in the award. The Tribunal has provided for mental pain and suffering for the loss of company of the deceased by 50%. There is no such head of claim permissible under law. The total compensation that would be payable Rs. 79000.- which I will take as Rs. 7,10,000/- and in excess of the compensation already assessed will attract interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till date of payment. The amount awarded shall be distributed between the mother and sister on the ratio 2:1.