Kamaljit Kaur and Another vs Jarnail Singh and Others

Vijender Singh Malik, J.—On the death of Lovepreet Kaur, a girl aged about 11 years, her parents filed a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation in a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-. Vide award dated 04.03.2011 learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fatehgarh Sahib (for short ''the Tribunal'') awarded a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants on the death of their daughter. Out of it, a sum of Rs. 90,000/- is the amount assessed to have been lost by the claimants in the death of Lovepreet Kaur and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is taken as transportation and funeral expenses. The appellants have brought this appeal challenging the said award and seeking enhancement in compensation. On 23.10.2006 at about 4.40 PM Lovepreet Kaur was coming from her house towards Bus Stand Mandi Gobindgarh on her bicycle. When she was near Committee Centre Mandi Gobindgarh, a trolla was parked on the left side of the road. In the meanwhile, another trolla bearing registration No. PCK-1181 came from the opposite side at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and had hit Lovepreet Kaur. Lovepreet Kaur succumbed to the injuries she suffered in the accident at PGI, Chandigarh on the next day. She was 11 years old at the time of her death. She was a brilliant student.

The claim petition has been resisted by respondents No. 1, 3 and 4 while respondent no. 2 was proceeded against ex-parte. They have denied the factum of accident as well as the manner in which it is claimed to have taken place. The insurance company has challenged the validity of the driving licence of the driver of the trolla.

Framing issues and taking evidence of the parties, learned Tribunal assessed the compensation in a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- vide the impugned award.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that learned Tribunal has grossly erred in assessing compensation at a very low amount. According to him, Hon''ble Supreme Court of India in a case reported as Manju Devi and Another Vs. Musafir Paswan and Another where the case was of death of a 13 years old boy, the award money of Rs. 90,000/- was enhanced to Rs. 2,25,000/-.

Learned counsel for respondent no. 3 has submitted, on the other hand, that there are subtle differences in the two cases. According to him, in the case in hand, the death is of a girl aged 11 years while in the reported case, there is death of a boy of the age of 13 years. According to him, a girl after attaining age of majority would have to be married and would no more there be in the family of her birth. According to him, the dependency of the parents of a girl is, thus, lesser than the dependency of a boy.

It is correct that there is difference in the facts of the case before me and Manju Devi''s case, supra as the deceased in the case in hand is 11 years and in the reported case, he was 13 years old boy, however, no differences can be made with regard to the gender of the child meeting with the accident. Keeping in view the fact that the age of the deceased in the case before me is 11 years, I find a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to be adequate compensation to the claimants for the death of Lovepreet Kaur in the accident. Consequently, I allow the appeal and enhance the compensation from Rs. 1,00,000/- to Rs. 2,00,000/-, which shall be payable to the claimants with interest and in the proportion given by the Tribunal in its award.