High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
Om Parkash v. Savita Rani & Ors - FAO-5423-2006  RD-P&H 12130 (7 December 2006)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
F.A.O No. 5423 of 2006
Date of decision : December 12, 2006
Om Parkash ... Appellant
Savita Rani and others ... Respondents
Present: Mr. Binderjit Singh, Advocate
for the appellant.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
UMA NATH SINGH, J (Oral)
This F.A.O arises out of an Award dated 01.08.2006 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ( hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), Sangrur, in M.A.C.T Case No.54 dated 20.10.2004 awarding a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs) with 6 per cent interest per annum in a death case of a young man of 32 years said to be engaged in running a Karyana Shop apart from working as a part time accountant with some business establishment.
F.A.O No. 5423 of 2006 2
Learned counsel for the owner-appellant has assailed the impugned Award only on the ground of quantum being higher. According to the learned counsel, the assessment of dependency appears to be faulty and contrary to the findings of the Tribunal. That apart, he has no other point to urge.
We have carefully gone through the averments made in the appeal and also perused the Award.
In para 13 of the Award, an endeavour has been made on behalf of the claimants to prove that the deceased was earning an income of Rs.14,400/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand and four hundred) from all his sources on the date of accident. The claimants have placed two salary certificates to the tune of Rs.4,400/- (Rupees Four thousand and four hundred) on record, and the witnesses who appeared before the Tribunal are said to have admitted the issuance of the certificates. Thus, the factum of accident is proved by the preponderance of evidence on record, including an eye witness account of Pawan Kumar apart from the documentary evidence. The Tribunal has taken a reasonable view in the assessment of compensation and it cannot be said that the dependency has been assessed without a valid ground. The deceased was survived by his widow, three minor children and a widowed mother. Despite the dependents being five, 1/3rd amount of earning of the deceased has been deducted towards his personal expenses.
Hence, we do not find any merit in the F.A.O which is dismissed in limine.
( UMA NATH SINGH )
( VINOD K. SHARMA )
December 12, 2006
F.A.O No. 5423 of 2006 3
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.