ANJANI SINGH vs. SALAUDDIN .

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4647 OF 2009 ANJANI SINGH & ORS. … APPELLANTS VS. SALAUDDIN & ORS. … RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T V. Gopala Gowda, J. This civil appeal is directed against the JUDGMENT th judgment and award dated 29 November, 2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No.236 of 2001, wherein the High Court allowed the said appeal and enhanced the compensation by 1,20,600/- and awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The same is questioned by the appellants- claimants, on the ground that just and reasonable Page 1 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 2 compensation was not awarded keeping in view the future prospects of income and further, correct multiplier method was not applied taking into

death. Lastly, compensation under the conventional heads towards loss of love and affection towards the widow, children and parents of the deceased was also not awarded. Hence, this appeal was filed by the appellants seeking further enhancement of compensation. 2. The facts in brief are stated hereunder: On 17.09.1997 Sergeant Dalbir Singh, husband of appellant No. 1, father of appellant nos. 2 to 4 and JUDGMENT son of appellant no. 5 died in a road accident. The accident took place at 10.15 p.m. on National Highway No. 28 between Air Force Station, Gorakhpur and Nandanagar Police Station, when the deceased was going on his bicycle and was hit by truck No. UP- 41A/1901 coming from Gorakhpur side. The said truck was driven by Respondent No.1, owned by Respondent Page 2 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 3 No.2 and insured by Respondent No.3, United India Insurance Company.

Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (in short “the Tribunal”) and claimed for 15,00,000/- as compensation for loss to estate of the deceased. The Tribunal held that, the deceased Sergeant Dalbir Singh died because of the accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 and awarded the appellants 2,49,600/- as compensation. The Tribunal determined the dependency of appellants as 31,000/- per annum and applied the JUDGMENT multiplier of 8 since the deceased suffered death at the age of 35 and the age of superannuation in the Air Force is 45-50 years. 3. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal, the appellants-claimants filed First Appeal No. 234 of 2011 before the High Court of Punjab and Page 3 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 4 Haryana at Chandigarh on 12.7.2000. The High Court allowed the appeal and held that assessment of monthly income by the Tribunal as 4030/- is correct

The finding of the Tribunal leading to deduction of rd 1/3 amount towards personal expenses was held to be erroneous. Hence, this finding was set aside and only th 1/4 of the compensation was deducted towards personal expenses. The total dependency amount came up to 3,62,700/- by applying a multiplier of 10 and 2,500/- was awarded towards funeral expenses and 5,000 towards loss of consortium for the widow of the deceased. In total, a compensation of 3,70,200/- JUDGMENT was awarded. Thus, the compensation was enhanced by 1,20,600/-, which carried an interest of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till the date of payment. rd 4. This Court, vide judgment dated 23 July, 2009, granted leave, and referred the issue to a larger bench. This was in view of the divergence of opinion Page 4 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 5 across judgments of this Court, and this aspect of the matter having not been considered in the earlier decisions, particularly in the absence of any

made by this Court in U.P. State Road Transport 1 Corporation & Ors. v. Trilok Chandra & Ors. , it was further directed to the Registry to place the matter before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for an appropriate order to constitute a larger Bench to answer the points referred to it. Pursuant to the said order, the matter was placed before a larger Bench which answered the points of reference in favour of the appellants, in the decision reported in JUDGMENT 2 Reshma Kumari & Ors. v. Madan Mohan & Anr. The points answered read as under: “40. In what we have discussed above, we sum up our conclusions as follows: (i) In the applications for compensation made un- der Section 166 of the 1988 Act in death cases where the age of the deceased is 15 years and above, the Claims Tribunals shall select the mul- tiplier as indicated in Column (4) of the table 1 (1996) 4 SCC 362 2 (2013) 9 SCC 65 Page 5 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 6

In view of the above decision of the larger Bench of this Court, the appellants were held entitled to Page 6 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 7 future prospects of income considered at the time of determination of compensation both by the Tribunal and High Court. The monthly salary of the deceased

was taken as in view of the answer to the points raised by this Court and keeping in view the age of the deceased which was 35 years, has taken 50% of the monthly salary to arrive at the multiplicand. Therefore, towards future prospects at the rate of 50% with monthly income of 4030/- it would come to 2015/-, making the total monthly income to 6045/-. Out of 6045/-, one fourth i.e. 1511/- shall be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, as per the JUDGMENT decision of this Court in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi 3 Transport Corporation & Anr. case, as the deceased has five dependents, thus the resultant figure would be 4534/- per month which after multiplying by 12 would come to 54,408/- as annual income. The multiplier would be 16 as per the above case which would come to 8,70,528/- under the head of loss of 3 (2009) 6 SCC 121 Page 7 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 8 dependency. We further award towards funeral expenses, a sum of 25,000/-, towards loss of love and affection of the children and the parents, a sum

of 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium by the widow of the deceased, as per the legal principle laid down by this Court in the three judge bench decision in 4 Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors. We also award a sum of 25,000/- for the cost of litigation as per the principle laid down by this Court in Balram 5 Prasad v. Kunal Saha & Ors. Therefore, the amount would come to 11,20,528/-. Further, the Tribunal has passed the award in the year 2000 and the appellants JUDGMENT have received 3,25,298/- on 22.7.2000 and 1,80,221/- on 9.3.2007. In total they have received 5,05,519/-. Now, they are entitled to the remaining amount, i.e. 6,15,009/-. This amount shall bear interest at the rate of 9% per annum following the decision of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi v. 4 (2013) 9 SCC 54 5 (2014) 1 SCC 384 Page 8 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 9 6 Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association & Ors. from the date of application till the date of payment. Out of this amount, 50% shall be deposited in any

remaining amount to be paid to them through demand draft within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The appeal is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ……………………………………………………………J. [GYAN SUDHA MISRA] ……………………………………………………………J. [V. GOPALA GOWDA] JUDGMENT New Delhi, April 25, 2014 6 (2011) 14 SCC 481 Page 9 C.A. No.4647 of 2009 1 ITEM NO.1E COURT NO.13 SECTION IV FOR JUDGMENT

VERSUS SALAUDDIN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date: 25/04/2014 This Appeal was called on for judgment today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Gowda pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Gyan Sudha Misra and His Lordship. Civil Appeal is allowed in terms of signed reportable judgment with no order as to costs. JUDGMENT (Pardeep Kumar) (Renu Diwan) Court Master [SIGNED REPORTABLE JUDGMENT IS PLACED ON THE FILE] AR-cum-PS Page 10