Court emphasized the correct application of multipliers and future prospects for determining compensation in wrongful death cases.

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Bahl, J.

The present order would dispose of three appeals i.e., FAO-4796-2009, FAO-5555-2009 & FAO-535-2010. FAO-4796-2009 has been filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited against MACT case No.209 of 2005 with respect to the death of Mukesh Kumar. The sole prayer in the said appeal is for reduction of the amount of compensation awarded to the claimants on account of the death of Mukesh Kumar, which was to the tune of Rs.37,57,000/- along with interest. FAO-5555-2009 has been filed by the widow and daughter of the deceased Mukesh Kumar and they are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded to them in MACT Case No.209 of 2005. FAO-535-2010 has also been filed by the appellants in FAO-5555-2009 i.e., Smt. Aruna, widow of Mukesh Kumar and Jaya daughter of Mukesh Kumar and they are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded on account of death of Shivam (son of Smt. Aruna and brother of Jaya) regarding which the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Tribunal') had granted total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- in MACT Case No.211 of 2005. In the said case, with respect to the death of Shivam, no appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company or any other party.

2. It would be relevant to note that the appeal filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited i.e., FAO-4796-2009 was earlier dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 05.10.2009 and subsequently, New India Assurance Company Limited had filed Civil Appeal No.2743 of 2010 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.01.2015 was pleased to set aside the judgment passed by this Court and had remanded the matter to this Court for decision on merits.

3. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that Mukesh Kumar, husband of Smt. Aruna and father of Jaya, as well as Shivam son of Smt. Aruna and brother of Jaya had died in the accident which had taken place on 23.02.2004.

4. Learned counsel for the claimants as well as learned counsel for the Insurance Company have jointly submitted that the only issue which arises in the present case is with respect to the amount of compensation that has to be awarded to the claimants and other issues, more so, with respect to the Insurance Company being liable and also the fact that Harlabh @ Harlal Singh was the driver of the offending vehicle and Devendra Kumar Sharma was the owner of the same and the said vehicle was insured by the Insurance Company i.e., New India Assurance Company Limited, are not in dispute.

5. Learned counsel for the claimants i.e., widow and daughter of deceased Mukesh Kumar, has submitted that with respect to the amount of compensation awarded in the MACT Case No.209 of 2005, the Tribunal had although assessed the annual income to be Rs.3,75,000/- per annum but had not granted any future prospects and since the age of the deceased was 42 years, thus, the benefit of additional 25% of salary as future prospects is required to be given to the claimants. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.96,800/- on account of loss of consortium is also required to be given to the claimants, which had not been given by the Tribunal. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.18,150/- on account of loss of estate and another amount of Rs.18,150/- on account of funeral expenses are required to be given to the claimants. It is submitted that the additional amount on account of the abovesaid accounts should be given to the claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the claimants-appellants has relied upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as Sarla Verma(Smt.)and