IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (i) FAO-8343-2017 (O&M)

New India Assurance Company Ltd.

...Appellant VERSUS Kamlesh and others ...Respondents (ii) FAO-5381-2018 (O&M)

Kamlesh and others ...Appellants VERSUS Dilbagh Singh and others ...Respondents Date of Decision: January 14, 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI Present: Mr.Rishab Jain, Advocate for Mr.Suman Jain, Advocate for the appellant (in FAO-8343-2017) and for respondent No.3 (in FAO-5381-2018).

Mr.Manu Sachdeva and Mr.Vikas Singh, Advocates for Mr.Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3 (in FAO-8343-2017) and for the appellants (in FAO-5381-2018).

Mr.C.P.Tiwana and Ms.Swati Tiwana, Advocates for respondents No.4 and 5 (in FAO-8343-2017) and for respondents No.1 and 2 (in FAO-5381-2018).

****

ARCHANA PURI, J.

These are two cross appeals, filed at the instance of insurance company, insurer of the offending truck bearing registration No.HR-56A- 9313 as well as the claimants, thereby, assailing the Award dated 28.07.2017, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby, compensation was granted by learned Tribunal, on account of death of Titi Ram, in a motor vehicular accident, which took place on 06.11.2015.

For the convenience of discussion, the parties are referred to as making appearance before learned Tribunal.

Learned Tribunal, while considering deceased Titi Ram to be working as Clerk, in the Government High School, Charkhi Dadri and also taking his earnings to be Rs.36,942/- per month and while considering the deceased to be 49 years old, had worked upon the compensation, as herein given:-

Sr.No. Heads Calculation (i) Salary/income ₹36942/- per month (ii) After adding 30% of (i) above (to be ₹36,942+11,082=48024/-

added as future prospects).

(iii) After deducting 2/3th of (ii) (deducted ₹48024 x2/3 = 32,016/-

as personal expenses of the deceased) per month i.e. 32,016 x

12= 3,84,192/- annually (iv) Compensation after multiplier of 13 is ₹3,84,192 x 13=

applied. ₹49,94,496/-

(v) Loss of consortium, love and affection, ₹1,00,000/-

estate, care and guidance minor children (vi) Funeral and transportation expenses ₹25,000/-

(vii) Total compensation calculated without ₹51,19,496/-

taking into account the financial assistant amount of 28,84,560/- which is to be deducted (viii) After deducting the amount to be ₹51,19,496-₹28,84,560/-

received by way of financial assistance equal to ₹22,34,936/-

from Government for a period of seven years The liability of the respondents i.e. driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle was held to be joint and several.

Feeling aggrieved, the insurance company as well as the claimants have filed the present appeals.

It is pertinent to mention that so far as the fact of the accident and the manner of taking place of the same is concerned, the same, as such, is not disputed by the insurance company as well as owner and driver of the offending vehicle, who are also making appearance in the present appeals. Even, the insurance company do not dispute about deceased to be working as Clerk in the Government High School, Charkhi Dadri, at the relevant time and monthly earnings of the deceased to be Rs.36,942/-, which also stands amply established from the testimony of PW-1 Sh.Suresh Sheoran. The date of birth of the deceased is established to be 02.04.1966 and as such, on the date of accident i.e. 06.11.2015, he is established to be 49 years old.

However, the insurance company had taken the plea that it was the categoric claim of the insurance company that respondent No.1-Dilbagh Singh was not having valid and effective driving licence, at the time of alleged accident and thus, he had violated the terms and conditions of the insurance company. Also, it is submitted that specific issue No.5 was framed to this effect, but however, the same, as such, has not been appropriately appraised. In fact, learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the driving licence of the respondent No.1-Dilbagh Singh, which has