FAO No.876 of 1990- -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.876 of 1990 DATE OF DECISION: February 17, 2011 DHANWANTI AND OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS PRAHLAD AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No ---- PRESENT: NONE FOR THE APPELLANTS. NONE FOR RESPONDENS NO.1 TO 3. MR. R.C. KAPOOR, ADVOCATE AND MR. GAUTAM BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE FOR MR. NAVEEN KAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim of compensation for death of a Police Constable in the Railway Protection Force. The claimants were widow, minor son and parents. He was aged 26 years and was at the time death drawing an income of `1164.80. 2. There is no representation on behalf of counsel for the appellant. I proceed to examine the case on the basis of records and with the assistance of counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company. I will adopt the formula as prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma vs. DTC, reported as 2009 6 SCC 121 and tabulate the claim for compensation, providing for prospect of increase in salary and a suitable FAO No.876 of 1990- -2- multiplier in relation to the age of the deceased as under:- Fatal Accidents Age: 26 Occupation Constable Claimants Widow, minor and parents Heads of Claim Tribunal High Court Sr.No. Amount ` Amount ` 1. Annual Income 1164.80 2. Add % of increase 50% 1746 3. Deduction (1/2,1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/4 4. Multiplicand 700 x 12 1309.50 x 12 5. Multiplier 16 17 6. Loss of Dependence 2,67,138 7. Medical Expenses 8. Loss of Consortium + loss of love and affection 7500 9. Loss to Estate 2500 10. Funeral Expenses 2000 Total 1,34,400 /- 2,79,138/- 3. The amount in excess over what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The amount shall be distributed amongst the claimants equally. 4. At the trial the insurance company had been exonerated on a finding that the copy of the policy filed in Court was not genuine. The policy was said to have been issued by the Lajpat Nagar Branch of the insurance company. The Deputy Manager of the company had been examined to say that there was no such branch and even the serial number in the copy of the policy could not have related to any of the branch offices. The Tribunal, therefore, fastened the liability only on the driver and owner of the vehicle which had been involved in the accident. I retain the same finding as regards the liability. FAO No.876 of 1990- -3- 5. The appeal is allowed for enhancement in the manner referred to above and the amount shall be distributed only between the widow and the child. 6. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Registry is directed to transmit the copy of the order directly to the party. February 17, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE