IMPORTANT POINT
Multiplier has to be applied on the basis on the age of the deceased.

JUDGMENT :

INDU MALHOTRA, J.

Leave granted.

1. The present Civil Appeal has been filed to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated 22.05.2015 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in FAO (MVA) No. 386 of 2014.

The Appellants herein have filed the present Civil Appeal for enhancement of the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla (“MACT”) and the High Court.

2. The factual matrix in which the present Civil Appeal arises is briefly stated as under :–

2.1. The daughter of the Appellants viz. Ambika Thakur was a student who was undertaking an Air Hostess Training Program at the Frankfinn Institute, Chandigarh.

2.2. On 10.9.2009, Ambika Thakur was travelling in a Verna car bearing Registration No. CH-04-H-0297 from Chandigarh to Bhatinda.

The car met with an accident with a Tata Ace vehicle bearing Registration No. PB-03T-4804 which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. The offending vehicle suddenly stopped in front of the Verna car, which led to head long collision between the two vehicles, and resulted in the death of Ambika Thakur on the spot. Ambika Thakur was 20 years old at the time of her death.

The offending vehicle was insured with the Respondent – Insurance Company.

2.3. The Appellants herein being the parents of the deceased, filed a Claim Petition before the MACT, Shimla claiming compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- on the death of their daughter.

2.4. The MACT vide Award dated 15.07.2014 granted compensation of Rs. 10,40,000/- to the Appellant – Claimants along with interest @7.5% p.a.

The compensation was awarded under the following heads :–

(i) The notional income of the deceased was taken as Rs. 15,000/ p.m.;

(ii) A deduction of 50% was made from the notional income of the deceased, since she was unmarried;

(iii) The MACT applied the Multiplier of 11 on the basis of the age of the mother of the deceased;

(iv) An amount of Rs. 25,000/was awarded towards loss of love and affection;

(v) An amount of Rs. 25,000/was awarded towards funeral expenses.

2.5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Award, the Appellants filed FAO (MVA) No. 386 of 2014 before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla for enhancement of compensation.

The High Court vide impugned Judgment dated 22.05.2015 dismissed the Appeal, and upheld the amount of compensation awarded by the MACT.

3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment, the Appellant – Claimants have filed the present Civil Appeal.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellants and the Respondent – Insurance Company.

3.1. The Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the MACT and the High Court applied the wrong Multiplier of 11 by erroneously taking into consideration the age of the mother of the deceased, instead of the age of the deceased.

It was submitted that as per the decision in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., ((2009) 6 SCC 121) the Multiplier of 18 ought to have been applied for the deceased who was 20 years old at the time of the accident.

3.2. It was further submitted that the Courts below failed to award compensation towards Future Prospects and loss of estate.

3.3. The Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the Courts below were justified in applying the Multiplier of 11 which should be as per the age of the mother of the deceased, and not the age of the deceased. Reliance was placed on this Court’s decision in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Shanti Pathak & Ors., ((2007) 10 SCC 1).

4. We have perused the judgments of the Courts below, and find that the wrong Multiplier has been applied to the facts of the present case.

The issue with respect to whether the Multiplier to be applied in the case of a bachelor, should be computed on the basis of the age of the deceased, or the age of the parents, is no longer res integra. This issue has been recently settled by a three Judge bench of this Court in Royal Sundaram Allian