Hegde, J. - (1.) A passenger bus belonging to the appellant while travelling from Ludhiana to Raikot met with an accident at about 9 a. m. on February 11, 1959. As a result of this accident, two persons namely Bachan Singh and Narinder Nath died on the spot and some others received minor injuries. The legal representatives of the deceased persons applied for compensation before the tribunal appointed under the Motor Vehicles Act. Their claim was opposed by the appellant as well as by the insurance company. Overruling the objections of the appellant as well as the insurance company, the tribunal found that the accident was due to the negilgence of the driver and therefore the claimants were entitled to compensation. The tribunal computed the compensation due to the legal representatives of Bachan Singh at Rs. 18,000/-. Out of that sum it determined the compensation due to the widow at Rs. 8,000/-; Rs. 4,000/- to his daughter Harbans Kaur and Rs. 6,000/- to his another daughter Balbir Kaur. But as the daughters had not made their claims within the prescribed time, it disallowed the compensation due to them and only granted a decree in favour of the widow of Bachan Singh. In the case of Narinder Nath, it computed the total compensation payable at Rs. 18,000/- and granted that sum to the legal representatives of Narinder Nath. It directed that the entire sum payable by the appellant should be paid by the insurance company. The insurance company as well as the legal representatives of the deceased persons appealed to the High Court. The High Court enhanced the compensation payable to the legal representatives of both Bachan Singh and Narinder Nath from Rs. 18,000/- to Rupees 36,000/-. It condoned the delay in making the claim by the daughters of Bachan Singh and consequently made the entire sum payable to his legal representatives. It also allowed the appeal of the insurance company and limited the amount payable by the insurance company to Rs. 2,000/- in the case of each one of the deceased persons. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, these appeals have been brought by special leave.
(2.) Now coming to the enhancement made by the High Court both Bachan Singh and Narinder Nath were 42 to 43 years old at the time of their death; both the tribunal and the High Court have come to the conclusion that Bachan Singh had annual income of about Rs. 9,000/-. Out of Rs. 9,000/-, Rs. 2,000/- was his income from immovable property; that income continued to accrue to the benefit of his wife and children; therefore only the income other than the income from immovable property which Bachan Singh was earring from his contract was taken into consideration. The High Court has come to the conclusion that Bachan Singh must have been spending at least Rs. 200/on his family every month. It must be remembered mat Bachan Singh had to marry two daughters. Therefore whatever he might have been able to save after meeting the family expenses and his own the same would have been utilised for the marriage expenses of the daughters. Both the tribunal and the High Court have computed the loss to the family of Bachan Singh by capitalising the benefit that the family was getting from him during his lifetime. The High Court did not accept the computation of the tribunal that Bachan Singh would have spent only Rs. 100/- on his family during his lifetime. We think the High Court was right in its conclusion. Taking into consideration the total income of Bachan Singh as well as the requirements of the family, it is reasonable to hold that he would have spent at least Rs. 200/- per month on his family. We cannot also overlook the fact that Bachan Singh in all reasonable possibility would have been able to earn more in the years to come, if he had not died.
(3.) It is true that Bachan Singh's daughters were not made parties to the petition filed by the widow of Bachan Singh, when she filed that petition, but later on they were impleaded. By the time they were impleaded, the time for filing application for compensation by the daughters had elapsed. It is conceded that under law, the tribunal had jurisdiction to condone the delay in making the claim. The tribunal had not chosen to condone the delay. But the High Court has in its discretion condone the delay. It is seen that the wife of Bachan Singh was an illiterate lady. She appears to have been quite helpless. In fact in her petition she specifically stated that she had no assistance and therefore she requested the court to give her the assistance of some lawyer. We do not think that we will be justified in interfering with the discretion exercised by the High Court in condoning the delay in question.;