The principles for assessing compensation under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, including the calculation of loss of earnings, the deduction for personal expenses, the application of the multiplier method, and the award of general damages for pain and suffering.

1. This judgment will dispose of three appeals viz., F.A.O. Nos. 169 and 170 of 1975 filed by the parents of deceased Sukhwinder Singh and Gurbinder Singh and F.A.O. No. 171 of 1975 filed by injured Balwinder Singh.

2. Three real brothers, namely Sukhwinder Singh, Gurbinder Singh and Balwinder Singh were going on Motor Cycle No. DHM-2452 when a Government jeep No. HIM-3633 coming from opposite direction and being driven rashly went out of control of the driver and came to the wrong side of the road and hit the motor cycle which was then being driven on its proper side. After the accident the driver of the jeep ran away. Lieutenant Gurbinder Singh and Sukhwinder Singh died at the spot and Balwinder Singh sustained serious injuries.

3. The parents of Sukhwinder Singh and Gurbinder Singh claimed compensation of rupees one lac in regard to the death of Sukhwinder Singh and rupees one lac on account of death of Gurbinder Singh. Balwinder Singh claimed rupees three lacs as compensation on account of the damage and monetary loss that he suffered as a result of the accident.

4. The Tribunal found that the jeep was driven rashly and on the wrong side of the road when the accident occurred; that the motor cycle was proceeding on its right side at that time; that the jeep was driven by Sh. Ramesh Kumar; and that Sukhwinder Singh who was driving the motor cycle contributed to the accident to the extent of 40% as he did not have driving license and carried on the motor cycle besides himself two more persons which was not permitted by law.

5. Since the Union of India had admitted the ownership of the jeep and also admitted that the accident occurred with that jeep, the Tribunal awarded compensation against the Union of India. From the amount of compensation so awarded to the claimants the Tribunal made a cut of 40% on account of contributory negligence of Sukhwinder Singh and a further cut of 20% because of the compensation being paid in lump sum.

6. Mr. V.P. Gandhi, the learned counsel for the appellants has urged and righty so that in view of the clear findings of the Tribunal to the effect that the motor cycle was driven on its right side; that the jeep which hit the motor cycle was driven rashly and on the wrong side of the road! and that at that time there was no obstruction to the view and every thing was visible from a distance, its conclusion that since Sukhwinder Singh did not possess any licence and that more than two persons were sitting on the motor cycle so he contributed to the accident to the extent of 40% is clearly untenable in law.

7. Contributory negligence is not to be presumed merely from the facts that Sukhwinder Singh did not hold a driving licence and that he was carrying more passengers on the vehicle than permitted under law. If Sukhwinder Singh was driving his motor cycle with due care and caution in that case it could not be held that he was liable for the contributory negligence. At times, even a most competent driver may be without a license. For example, he may, by sheer inadvertence, have failed to have his license renewed. Such a driver cannot be held to be negligent merely from the fact that he was driving without a licence. The matter is not res integra. We have on this point the authoritative enunciation by Supreme Court in Gobald Motor Service Ltd. V/s. R.M.K. Veluswami, AIR 1962 SC 1 and there are also two decisions of our own High Court - Mansha Ram V/s. Tej Bhan, (1957) 59 Punj LR 372 : (AIR 1958 Punj 5) and Dharamchand V/s. Shivpat, 1966 Acc CJ 319.

8. I, therefore, reverse the finding of the Tribunal that Sukhwinder Singh who was driving the motor cycle did contribute to the happening of the accident.

9. When it came to the awarding of compensation it appears the Tribunal clearly became tight-fisted.

10. According to P.W. 9 Shri D.S. Jaswal, Sukhwinder Singh who was aged 20 years was a trained Pilot and got C Certificate. He was holding a Pilot s licence. He was scheduled to join at