U P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. TRILOKCHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) The short question which we are called upon to consider in this appeal relates to the use of the correct multiplier for determination of compensation to be awarded to the legal representatives of a victim of a road accident. The question arises in the backdrop of the following facts.

(3.) Prem Chandra, aged about 26 years, met with a fatal accident on 1st August, 1977. He was knocked down by an omnibus bearing Registration No. UTM 1802 belonging to the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation. His legal representatives preferred a claim for compensation. Taking his earning capacity at Rs. 300/- per month, it was estimated that he spent Rs. 200/- per month on his family members. Fixing the life expectancy at 60 years, the Tribunal deducted 36 years and held that the family was deprived of his earning for 24 years. The compensation was thus worked out at Rs. 57,600/- (200 x 12 x 24). This amount was raised to Rs. 81,600/- as it was realised that the Tribunal had wrongly taken the age of the deceased at 36 instead of 26 years and had, therefore, committed an error in employing the multiplier of 24 years purchase factor instead of 34 years purchase factor. Thus, the compensation came to Rs. 200 x 12 x 34=81,600/-. The question then is whether the Tribunal was right in employing the multiplier of 24 or the High Court was right in employing the multiplier of 34