The main legal point established is the correct assessment of compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act based on the deceased's monthly income, deductions, and application of multipliers as per legal principles.

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. Briefly it may be noticed that a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act was filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (herein after to be referred as the Tribunal) claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lacs on account of death of Brij Kumar Bhatia in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 29.3.2005. Claimants were the widow, two sons, daughter and aged widowed mother of the deceased.

3. Case set up on behalf of the claimants was that on 29.3.2005 while the deceased was proceeding on a bicycle, a Qualis vehicle bearing registration no. CH-03C-3728 being driven by Sukhdev Singh in a rash and negligent manner, struck against the bicycle and on account of which severe injuries were suffered by Brij Kumar Bhatia and who succumbed to the same. Deceased was stated to be 54 years of age at the time of accident and was working and posted as Clerk in a Govt. High School and getting Rs.11,735/- per month as salary from the Education Department, State of Haryana. It was further averred that the widow, two sons, daughter and aged widowed mother were totally dependent on the earnings of the deceased.

4. The claim petition was contested by the owner/driver as also the insurance company by filing separate written statements.

5. Upon the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:-

“1. Whether the present accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of Jeep No. CH-03C-3728 by respondent no.1 Sukhdev Singh alias Sukha? OPP

2. Whether Brij Kumar Bhatia died as a result of injuries received in the present motor vehicular accident which took place on 29.3.2005 if so, to what amount of compensation the claimants are entitled to receive. OPP

3. Who is liable for the payment of amount of compensation? OPP Parties.

4. Whether respondent no.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence and the car in question was being driven in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, if so, to what effect? OPR-3.

5. Relief.”

6. As regards Issue No.1 findings were returned in favour of the claimants and it was held that the death of Brij Kumar Bhatia took place on account of injuries suffered in the accident involving the offending vehicle in question and on account of the rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1 Sukhdev Singh.

7. As regards quantum of compensation, Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.9500/- per month. Age of the deceased has been taken as 54 years. A deduction of 1/3rd has been made from the monthly income towards living and personal expenses of the deceased. Tribunal by taking into reckoning that the deceased was to superannuate on 31.5.2009, has taken the monthly salary as Rs.9500/- per month till the date of superannuation and a sum of Rs.4500/- per month thereafter. By adopting a unique methodology a multiplier of 11 has been bifurcated into two components. For the period that the deceased would have remained in service, a multiplier of 4 has been applied and post retirement by taking monthly income to be Rs.4500/- a multiplier of 7 has been applied. That apart, a sum of Rs.2,000/- has been awarded towards funeral expenses, Rs.2500/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- on account of loss of consortium. Thus, the total compensation awarded in favour of claimants is Rs.5,65,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim petition till actual realization. Liability to pay compensation amount has been fastened jointly and severally upon the respondents i.e. the owner, driver as also the insurance company.

8. Since the only issue involved in the instant appeal is with regard to quantum of compensation, I have heard counsel for the appellants as also for the contesting respondent no.3-Insu