SARDAR KAUR Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING dissatisfied with the judgment of the learned Single Judge whereby he enhanced the amount of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani from Rs. 12,600/- to Rs. 25,200/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, the claimant-appellant has filed this Letters Patent Appeal.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Shri Brij Raj Singh, son of the appellant was killed in a road accident which took place on 20.8.1980 near PWD Rest House, Hansi Road, Bhiwani. At the time of death, Brij Raj Singh was unmarried and was employed as A.D.M. in the Haryana Land Reclamation and Development Corporation and was getting monthly salary of Rs. 711.80. The appellant filed a claim petition for award of compensation to the tune of Rs. 40,000/-. The driver of the truck No. HYD-195 which was involved in the accident, the insurer i.e. the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd. and the owner of the truck filed written statements and contested the claimant's plea about the manner in which the accident had taken place. They also questioned the locus standi of the claimant. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed the following issues :- (1) Whether accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of vehicles Nos. HYA-8379 by respondent No. 5 and HYD-195 by respondent No. 6 ? (2) To what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled, if so from whom ? (3) Whether the petition is barred by time ? (4) Whether the petitioner has no locus standi to file the petition ? (5) Whether the petition is the result of collusion between respondents No. 1 to 5 with petitioner; if so, to what effect ? (6) Whether respondents are not liable to pay any compensation as alleged ? (7) Relief. After recording evidence of the parties and analysing the same, the Tribunal held that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver, Mohinder Singh. The Tribunal further held that the age of the deceased can be taken as 28 years and that of the claimant as 60 years. It also noticed that the monthly salary of the deceased was Rs. 711.80 and he was getting Rs. 593.80 after deductions towards C.T.D., E.P.F., F.P.F. and security etc. However, it did not accept the claimant's version that the deceased was contributing Rs. 400/- per month for the maintenance of his mother. It held that the deceased would have contributed at least Rs. 150/- per month i.e. Rs. 1,800/- per annum for support and maintenance of his mother. To this, Tribunal applied multiplier of '7' and awarded Rs. 12,600/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

(3.) IN the Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant has sought further enhancement of the compensation on the ground that the Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge has erred in fixing Rs. 300/- per month as contribution of the deceased towards his family and there is no justification to apply the multiplier of '7' because the normal life span is 75 years.