FAO No. 686 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 686 of 2011 Date of decision April 27, 2011 Santosh Rani and another ....... Appellants Versus Balihar Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN resent:- Mr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma , Advocate for the appellants. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for death of an agriculturist aged 54 years. The claimants stated that the deceased used to cultivate the land of others and was drawing `25,000/- per month. The claimants stated that he had his own tractor and assessment made by the Tribunal that he was earning `3600/- per month was grossly low. Although, it is correct that there could not be documentary proof for an agriculturist's income, I cannot take that he could have earned any more than what the Tribunal had assessed only on the oral assertion of the claimant that he was earning `25,000/- per month. At least the persons whose lands were said to be cultivated must have been examined to prove the fact that the deceased was cultivating the land of FAO No. 686 of 2011 2 others and he was earning more than what was assessed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had made an assessment on the basis that he would have earned `120/- per day as an agricultural labourer. The Tribunal adopted the scales of compensation provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sarla Verma Vs.Delhi Road Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SC 121 made a deduction of 1/3rd and adopted a multiplier of 11 and also added the conventional heads of claim for loss of consortium, loss of love and affection for children, funeral expenses to make an over all assessment of `3,20,800/-. 2. I find no scope for enhancement for the quality of evidence that was let before the Tribunal. I affirm the same. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 27, 2011 archana