FAO No.1798 of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1798 of 2001 Date of Decision. 25.08.2010 Harpreet Kaur wife of Maninder Singh and another ......Appellants Versus Kulwinder Singh son of Mohan Singh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the appellants. None for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. This case is posted along with FAO No.32 of 2001, which is appeal filed in relation to the very same award at the instance of the insurer. At the time when the matter was taken for argument, it was noticed that the owners of the vehicle have not been served by the insurance company and the notices had been returned on the ground that addresses given were not correct. The insurance company must have taken steps to ascertain the correct address and take fresh process. I do not want to delay the consideration of the case seeking for enhancement filed by the parents of the deceased in view of the fact that even if the insurer's contention FAO No.1798 of 2001 -2- were to be accepted, it would only provide for a right of recovery in the absence against the owner, for according to the insurer the driver did not have a valid driving licence. I, therefore, delink the case from the connected matter in FAO No.32 of 2001 and take up the above appeal alone for consideration. 2. The involvement of the vehicle is not dispute. The deceased was a child aged 8 years and the claimants were the parents. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.72,000/- and the appeal is filed by the parents seeking for enhancement. Their contention is that the child was only a son and the Tribunal properly considered the relevant facts for arriving at a just compensation. Learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priya Vasant Kalgutkar Vs. Murad Shaikh and others AIR 2010 SC 40 where for a death of a 9 year child, while accepting the enhancement made by the High Court against the original compensation of Rs.1,12,000/-, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has awarded another Rs.50,000/- as special damages for children aged between 5 to 10 years and another Rs.25,000/- as conventional figures going towards loss of love and affection and enhanced the compensation which was determined by the Tribunal to Rs.2,00,000/-. However, it made a distinction in Lata Wadhwa Vs. State of Bihar 2001(8) SCC 197 where on recommendation by the Chief Justice Chandrachud (retired), compensation of Rs.3.60 lacs had been awarded for death of children. That was in a particular situation where the enquiry led by Justice Chandrachud took note of the special circumstance that the children in TISCO FAO No.1798 of 2001 -3- were offered employment normally and therefore, there was a sure prospect of their income earning capacity through their employment. Here in this case, no special circumstances are reported except the contention of the learned counsel that the child was a very bright child studing in a public school. The child was the only son for the parents. The saving grace has been that the claimants have three daughters surviving. I would follow the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priya Vasant Kalgutkar's case (supra)and enhance the amount to Rs.2 lacs. The amount in excess of what was already determined shall bear interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. The award passed shall not in any way prejudice the rights of the contention of the insurer in the appeal filed by it and pending in FAO No.32 of 2001 when the matter is to be taken up after service by this Court. 4. The appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 25, 2010 Pankaj*