DAYAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimants the award dated 11.3.1986 passed by the have filed this appeal for modification of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal ( for short 'the Tribunal' ) whereby the claimants have been awarded compensanon of Rs. 1,67,440 on account of the death of Inderjit Singh Bajaj in a road accident.

(2.) Inderjit Singh Bajaj was hit by the Uaryana Roadways bus bearing No. HYM 6301, which was being driven rashly and negligently by Ajmer Singh, respondent No. 2, at about 2.30 p.m. on 22.9.1985, while he was proceeding on the Railway Road, Karnal, towards the railway station. He received multiple injuries and became unconscious on the spot. He was shifted to the Civil Hospital, Karnal. Thereafter, he was shifted to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences on the same day and then ID the Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi. Ultimately, he died on 29.9.1985, i.e., after a week, without regaining consciousness. A case was registered at the Police Station City, Karnal. The deceased was about 32 years of age at the time of the accident and he was working as Junior Assistant in the Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewell Corporation, Karnal (for short 'the Tube- well Corporation' ). He was drawing a salary of Rs. 1,324.30 per month besides the additional D.A. sanctioned by the government. A sum of Rs. 5,000 was spent on his treatment and another sum of Rs. 5,000 was spent on the cremation. He left behind his parents, Dayal Singh and Ram Piari, widow Suman Lata and two minor daughters, namely, Supriya and Anu Pria. His wife Suman Lata was pregnant at the time of his death. A third daughter was born to her after the death of Inderjit Singh Bajaj. As all of them were dependent upon Inderjit Singh Bajaj, they claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000 and also interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of petition till realisation. The Tribunal after examining the evidence adduced on record found the version given by the claimants truthful and awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,67,400 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of petition till realisation. While calculating compensation, the Tribunal deducted one third amount as the personal expenses of the deceased and in this way he assessed the dependency of the claimants at Rs. 820 per month and applied the multiplier of 16. Claimants have challenged the calculations made by the Tribunal for determining the amount of compensation by filing the present appeal.

(3.) Mr. L.M. Suri, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellants, contends that in the present case, the compensation ought to have been awarded on the basis of unit system. In this regard he has placed reliance on U.P. State Road Trans. Corpn. v. Trilok Chandra, 1996 ACJ 831 (SC). The learned counsel contends that in the present case, the parents, widow and three minor daughters (one born after the death of the deceased) were dependent upon the deceased. As per unit system as enumerated in U.P. State Road Trans. Corpn. v. Trilok Chandra (supra), each of the adults would be entitled to 2 units and the minor children would be entitled to one unit each. In this way, the parents of the deceased would be entitled to 4 units and the widow would be entitled to 2 units. The 3 minor daughters would be entitled to 3 units. Besides this, 2 units would be earmarked for the deceased. Thus, the entire family would be entitled for 11 units. While calculating the amount of compensation for being paid to the claimants, 2 units which the deceased was spending upon himself are to be deducted out of his total salary. The counsel contends that the deceased, who was employed as a Junior Assistant in the Tubewell Corporation, was getting a total salary of Rs. 1,324 per month, besides one month's salary as stationary bonus every year. Thus, the total monthly salary being drawn by the deceased comes to Rs. 1,450. He contends that 2 units salary (Rs. 264) ought to have been deducted out of the total monthly salary, being the personal expenses of the deceased. By deducting the personal expenses of the deceased, the dependency of claimants would come to Rs. 1,186 per month. It is further contended by the learned counsel that the deceased was 32 years of age at the time of accident and the multiplier of 18 is required to be applied for calculating the amount of compensation, as per the new Schedule. It is contended that although the new Schedule is not applicable but the principle of determining the compensation and multiplier to he applied would be the same. Thus, the counsel prays that the claimants would be entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,186 x 12 x 18 = Rs. 2,56,176.