IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2088 of 2002 Date of decision: December 17, 2008 Krishna Pahuja & others ... Appellants Versus Sukhdev Singh & others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. N.L. Sammi, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. R.C. Kapoor, Advocate for the NIC Ltd. *** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? AJAY TEWARI, J.(Oral) This appeal has been filed against the order dated 01.02.2002 passed by the MACT, Chandigarh awarding an amount of Rs.2,74,000/- for the death of Shiv Dayal to his wife and four children. The Tribunal held his income to Rs.3,000/- per month and dependency is fixed as Rs.2,000/- per month. No fault can be found with this. However, I find that the multiplier of 11 is too low. As far as the Schedule is concerned, the multiplier of 13 has to be applied. Considering the fact that trend is towards a lesser amount of the multiplier, I feel it would be appropriate if the multiplier of 12 is allowed i.e. Rs.24,000/-. It may be mentioned that at one stage when the matter had come in Lok Adalat, the FAO No.2088 of 2002 -2- parties had agreed that Rs.50,000/- would be a fair increase however later on it transpired that the Insurance Company had been granted the right of recovery and thus, the officer was not competent to compromise the matter. In these peculiar circumstances, I direct that the appellants would get the increased compensation (as computed with the multiplier at 12) with 10% interest from the date of filing the petition till the date of payment. December 17, 2008 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE