Accident--Income of a house wife has to be assessed atleast at par with the minimum class IV basic pay.
Accident--Future Prospects--House wife--She constitute a separate category--It would be appropriate if an increase of 15% is granted in this case on account of future prospects.
Accident--Sitting capacity of vehicle--More persons were travelling in the offending vehicle than the sitting capacity--Insurance company cannot be absolved of its liability to pay.

Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, J.: -This order shall dispose of three appeals bearing FAO Nos.3373 of 2007 and 753 & 754 of 2008.

2. FAO No. 3373 of 2007 has been filed by the claimants dependents of Smt. Phulli Devi, FAO No. 753 of 2008 has been filed by driver and the owner of the offending vehicle questioning the exoneration of the insurance company in the claim petition filed by the dependents of deceased Smt. Phulli wife of Ramphal and FAO No. 754 of 2008 challenging the grant of compensation to the injured Om Parkash and the exoneration of the Insurance Company from the liability.

3. Shorn off the intricate details, a brief compendium of the facts is that the accident took place on 8.07.2005 in which Smt. Phulli lost her life. She was aged about 50 years and was a house wife. Another person, namely, one Om Parkash was injured in that case. The dependents of Smt. Phulli filed claim petition claiming compensation on account of death of Smt. Phulli and Om Parkash filed claim petition claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(for short, ‘the Tribunal’) allowed both the petitions vide its award dated 9.05.2007 wherein the claimants Ramphal and others were granted a compensation of Rs. 2,15,000/- whereas Om Parkash was granted Rs. 66,500/- as compensation, Interest @ 7.5% per annum from the day of filing of the petition till realisation of the amount was also granted. It was further ordered that since the vehicle was insured, the primary responsibility to deposit the amount of compensation would be of insurance company, however, the insurance company would be entitled to recover the same from the owner/insured by filing the execution proceedings.

4. Aggrieved of this award, the owner and the driver have filed the appeals challenging the award on the ground that compensation should not have been granted and that if at all it is to be granted then it is the responsibility of the insurance company. Claimants in case of Ramphal etc. have filed the appeal for enhancement of the compensation. However, no appeal is stated to have been filed by Om Parkash.

5. Shri S.K.Verma, learned counsel for the appellant in FAO No. 3373 of 2007 has argued that the Tribunal has gone wrong in law in assessing the income of the deceased Smt. Phulli to the only Rs. 2100/-. He has further argued that since the age of the deceased Smt. Phulli was less than 51, therefore, the multiplier of 13 should have been applied in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another [2009(3) Law Herald (SC) 2107] : 2009(3) R.C.R.(Civil)77. He has further argued that the loss of consortium should have been awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.25,000/- as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment rendered in the case of Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others [2013(4) Law Herald (SC) 3006 : 2013(3) Law Herald (P&H) 2274 (SC)] : 2013(3) RCR(Civil). He argues that the amount of Rs. 15,000/- only awarded on account of funeral and last rites is too insufficient and this deserves to be enhanced. Counsel for the appellant further argues that the dependency should be treated to have increased on account of future prospects in the coming years.

6. A perusal of the record shows that the age of the deceased Smt. Phulli has been assessed to be about 50 years i.e. less than 51 years. Therefore, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Supra), the multiplier of 13 is the appropriate multiplier. So far as the income and the future prospects are concerned the Tribunal has assessed the income to be Rs.2100/- per month on account of services rendered by the deceased Smt. Phulli in the house-hold chorus on the logic that if one is to hire the services which were rendered by the deceased such service would not be available for less than Rs.2100/- per month. While deducting 1/3rd the dependency has been treated at Rs.