O R D E R

K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI. -- Delay condoned. Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel.

2. Respondents 1 and 2 herein - the husband and son of one Amarjit Kaur who died in a motor accident involving a Punjab roadways bus, filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridkot. As against the compensation of Rs.5 lacs claimed, the Tribunal, on 1.12.1998 awarded a compensation of Rs.1,44,000. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, respondents 1 and 2 filed FAO No.1549/1999 before the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The said appeal was referred to Lok Adalat organised by the High Court, for settlement.

3. The High Court Lok Adalat took up the case on 3.8.2001. The parties were not present. Their counsel were present. After hearing them the Lok Adalat passed the following order :

FAO No.1549 of 1999

"After hearing counsel for the parties, we propose to increase in the amount of compensation, which is considered just and reasonable in this case.

The accident took place on March 4, 1997. Amarjit Kaur, aged about 32 years, died in the accident. Her husband and minor son claimed compensation. The Tribunal granted Rs.1,44,000/- along with 12 percent per annum interest. Feeling dissatisfied, they are in appeal.

The deceased was doing household work and also looking after some cattle and selling milk. The tribunal fixed earning capacity at Rs.900/- and dependency at Rs.600/- Applying multiplier of 15, compensation was worked out at Rs.1,08,000/-. To this a sum of Rs.28,253 on account of medical expenses, Rs.2147/- towards incidental charges and Rs.5600/- towards hospital charges were allowed. We are of the opinion that the earning capacity of the household wife has been determined on the lower side. An ordinary labourer gets Rs.1200/- per mensem and at the lowest at least Rs.1200/- should have been determined the earning capacity of the deceased and dependency of the claimants at Rs.800/-. The multiplier of 15 applied in this case is also on the lower side. Since the deceased was aged 32 years, as per Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, multiplier should have been 17. Thus, compensation worked out at Rs.1,63,200/- (Rs.800/- x 12 x 17). To this a sum of Rs.7,000/- is added i.e. Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium, payable to the husband, making total compensation payable at Rs.1,70,200/-. The Tribunal under this head allowed compensation of Rs.1,08,000/- i.e. under this head the claimants would get Rs.62,200/- over and above that amount. The compensation granted under other heads is considered just and reasonable.

Thus, while allowing the appeal, we grant compensation of Rs.62,200/- over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal to the appellants, who would share it equally. On this amount they will get interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. July 28, 1997, till payment. Two months time is allowed to the respondents to make the payment.

If the parties object to the proposed order as above, they may move the High Court within two months for disposal of the appeal on merits according to law.

Copies of the order be supplied to the counsel for the parties." (emphasis supplied)

4. Punjab Roadways (second appellant herein) filed an application dated 15.1.2002 (CM No.13988-CII of 2002 in FAO No.1549/1999) to set aside order dated 3.8.2001 passed by the Lok Adalat, as it was passed without their consent. The said application was rejected by a learned Single Judge by a short order dated 11.9.2002 on the ground that such objections were not maintainable or entertainable, having regard to its decision in Charanjit Kaur v. Balwant Singh (CM No.13988-CII of 2002 in FAO No.1827/1999 decided on 30.7.2002) and other cases. In Charanjit Kaur, the learned single Judge had held that an o