Skip to content


Suraj Parkash and ors. Vs. Ram Nath and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported inI(1986)ACC175
AppellantSuraj Parkash and ors.
RespondentRam Nath and ors.
Cases ReferredParkash Chand v. Pal Singh
Excerpt:
.....matters, heavy onus would like on petitioner bidder to establish his allegations as state action shall always be presumed to be in accordance with law - as is now well-known, an able-bodied young labourer has an earning capacity of at least rs. in the case of narain kumar, the fact that he had worked with haryana roadways and also possessed the conductor's licence clearly implies that he had the capacity, as also the chance of working as a bus conductor or something equivalent to that......here is for enhanced compensation. the claimants being to parents, brothers and sister of narain kumar deceased, who was killed when the truck hra 9682 coming from the opposite direction hit into his cycle. this happened on november 15, 1977, on the zirakpur panchkula road.2. it was the finding of the tribunal that the accident had been caused entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck driver. a sum of rs. 15,300/- was awarded as compensation.3. according to the evidence on record, narain kumar deceased wag about 20 years of age at the time of his death. he was unemployed at the time of the accident, but had earlier been working as a helper in the haryana roadways workshop and according to his father aw 3 suraj parkash he also possessed conductor's licence. as is now.....
Judgment:

S.S. Sodhi, J.

1. The claim in appeal here is for enhanced compensation. The claimants being to parents, brothers and sister of Narain Kumar deceased, who was killed when the Truck HRA 9682 coming from the opposite direction hit into his cycle. This happened on November 15, 1977, on the Zirakpur Panchkula road.

2. It was the finding of the Tribunal that the accident had been caused entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck driver. A sum of Rs. 15,300/- was awarded as compensation.

3. According to the evidence on record, Narain Kumar deceased wag about 20 years of age at the time of his death. He was unemployed at the time of the accident, but had earlier been working as a helper in the Haryana Roadways Workshop and according to his father AW 3 Suraj Parkash he also possessed Conductor's licence. As is now well-known, an able-bodied young labourer has an earning capacity of at least Rs. 300/- to Rs. 400/-per month. In the case of Narain Kumar, the fact that he had worked with Haryana Roadways and also possessed the Conductor's licence clearly implies that he had the capacity, as also the chance of working as a bus conductor or something equivalent to that. The loss to the parents must thus be assessed in this light. Narain Kumar was unmarried at the time his death, but it is reasonable to assume that had he lived, he would have got married and raised a family and it is from what have been left with him after meeting their expenses too that he could have supported his parents. Suraj Parkash, the father of the deceased, was only about 46 years of age when his son died. The mother of the deceased would presumably be somewhat younger.

4. Taking an overall view of the circumstances of the claimants and the deceased in the context of the principles laid down by the Full Bench in Lachhman Singh v. Gurmit Kaur 1979 PLR 1, it would be fair and just to assess the compensation payable to the claimants, i.e., the parents at Rs. 30,000/-. The compensation payable to them is accordingly hereby enhanced to that sum. They shall, in addition, be (sic) to interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application to the date of payment of the amount awarded. It may be clarified that keeping in view the judgment of the Full Bench in FAO 135 of 1980 Parkash Chand v. Pal Singh etc decided on May 7, 1985, no compensation would be payable in this case to the brothers and sister of the deceased. The entire compensation would thus be payable to the parents alone.

5. This appeal is accordingly hereby accepted with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 500/-.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //