Darshana vs Shri Bhagwan

Ajay Tewari, J.—This appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants for the enhancement of compensation and to modify the award dated 12.03.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh on account of death of Amar Singh, aged about 51 years, in a motor vehicular accident. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs. 9190/- p.m., while applying the deduction of 1/4th and also applied the multiplier of 12 the Tribunal awarded Rs. 10,52,000/- (i.e. Rs. 9,92,520/- for loss of dependency, Rs. 50,000/- bonus, Rs. 2500/- for loss of estate, Rs. 2,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium) as compensation against death along with interest @ 7.5 p.a.

Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the Tribunal has erred in not including the bonus in the income and only awarding compensation Rs. 50,000/- in lump sum on account of bonus and has relied upon Smt. Avantika Aggarwal and Others Vs. Sh. Vinod Kumar Yadav, wherein the Delhi High Court held as follows:--

"P.10. As regards, the leave travel allowances also the Hon''ble Apex Court has held in Indira Srivastava''s case (Supra) that the same is enjoyed by virtue of the vocation in which the deceased was prior to his death and the same need not be included in the salary while computing the net earnings of the deceased. Therefore, in the instant case, the leave travel allowances also cannot be included in the income of the deceased. As regards, bonus and provident fund is concerned, same shall be allowed to be included in the income of the deceased as bonus is payable as a part of the salary and contribution towards provident fund is in the form of deferred payments and are in the form of savings".

Learned counsel for the respondents are not in a position to cite any contrary judgment, consequently this plea is accepted and it is directed that the bonus earned be added in the income and the amount of Rs. 50,000/- be deducted.

Learned counsel for the appellants has further argued nothing has been awarded on account of future prospects and consortium and has relied upon the law laid down in Rajesh and Others Vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, , some amount has to be awarded on account of loss of consortium. He has further argued that 15% has to be added to the income on account of future prospects.

Learned counsel for the appellants has further argued that and under conventional heads only an amount of Rs. 9500/- has been awarded and has relied upon the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Vimal Kanwar and Others Vs. Kishore Dan and Others, .

Learned counsel for the respondent No. 3-insurance company has argued that the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Rajesh and others'' case (supra) granted a total amount of Rs. 1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs. 1 lac to three minor children for loss of care and guidance.

Learned counsel for the appellants, on the other hand, has contended that in Vimal Kanwar and others'' case (supra), the Hon''ble Supreme Court awarded a sum of Rs. 1 lac to the widow and a sum of Rs. 2 lac to the minor girl & another amount of Rs. 1 lac to the mother on account of loss of love and affection, and another sum of Rs. 1 lac towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs. 1 lac to the mother.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 3-insurance company has argued that once the age of the deceased established 51 years the multiplier of 12 could not have been applied as per Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, the same could have been only 11. I find it is correct. I grant multiplier 11 instead of 12. Keeping in view the entire conspectus of facts, I award an amount of Rs. 1 lacs for loss of consortium and Rs. 1 lac for loss of love and affection to the appellant No. 1-widow. I further award an amount of Rs. 1 lacs each to the appellant Nos. 3 and 4-daughters and an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the appellant No. 2 and Rs. 50,000/- to the appellant No. 5 on account of loss of love and affection. I further hold that multiplier of 11 has to be applied in view of the Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, . I also add future prospects in the income with the addition of 15% in view of the observations made by this Court in F.A.O. No. 929 of 2014 (O & M), titled as National Insurance Company Limited v. Gur-dev Kaur and others, decided on 18.02.2014. I further grant an amount of Rs. 20,000/- towards funeral expenses. Apart from the individual amounts awarded, the entire enhanced amount if any shall fall to the share of the appellant No. 1.

The appeal stands allowed in the above terms and the award is modified accordingly. Since the main case has been decided, the pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.