JUDGMENT
A.S. Garg, J.
1. One Dr. D.V. Atri, aged about 50 years, was proceeding to Primary Health Centre, Missing to attend to his official duty, on 1.12.1981 on his Moped No. HYC-9905, on correct side of Karnal-Kaithal Road, when he was hit and run over by the Haryana Roadways Bus No. HRD-5690. Satnam Singh, the respondent was the driver of the said bus. Ultimately, the deceased was brought to P.G.I, where he died on 9.12.1981 on account of serious injuries received by him in the accident itself.
2. Since the said human life had been lost, the widow-and son of the deceased brought a claim petition for compensation on the ground that the deceased was a Medical Officer and life was cut short and that they entitled to the compensation. The deceased was said to be drawing salary of Rs. 2,547/- per month.
3. The driver of the ill-fated bus denied the accident itself. However, on a contest the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, held that it was the fault of the said driver and observed that from the amount of salary aforesaid the deceased must have been contributing Rs. 1,250/- towards the needs of the family. The annual dependency was fixed over Rs. 15,000/-. It was also observed that the age of retirement was 55 years. Looking at such a situation, the multiplier of six was applied and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum was awarded to the claimants.
4. When the matter came up before the learned Single Judge, the appeal filed by State was dismissed while in the appeal filed by the appellant-claimants it was observed that the retirement age was 58 years and therefore, the deceased had yet 8 years of service at his credit. It was also observed that the multiplier of six was not the correct one and a multiplier of ten was thought to be appropriate. The interest was also enhanced from 6 per cent to 12 per cent per annum and this brought the figure of total compensation to Rs. 1,50,000/- and accordingly the appeal of the appellants was disposed of.
5. Still not satisfied with the amount of compensation, the appellants came up in L.P.A. and had claimed that the compensation awarded for the death of doctor was far inadequate than what it should have been.
6. After hearing both the sides, we are of the view that when the admitted salary of the deceased was Rs. 2,547/- and it had been observed throughout that 1/3rd out of the same was being spent by the deceased on himself, therefore, the dependency for the family of the deceased come to Rs. 1,700/- per mensem. Thus, the appellants have a legitimate and genuine claim for enhancement proportionate to the salary actually drawn by the deceased. Therefore, the compensation payable to the appellants comes to Rs. 1700 x 12 x 10 = Rs. 2,04,000/-. We are also of the view that the multiplier applied need not be enhanced nor the rate of interest is required to be changed. The widow has no chance of remarriage and by now the son must have grown up and having his independent source of income. Therefore, out of the total amount of compensation an amount of Rs. 1,54,000/- be paid to the widow and Rs. 50,000/- to the son. Hence, the Letters Patent Appeal is allowed accordingly to the extent indicated above.