FAO No.5695 of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.5695 of 2004 Date of Decision.01.12.2010 Anita daughter of late Budh Ram and others ......Appellants Versus Karam Singh son of Baldev Singh resident of village Hadoli, P.S. Chhachhrauli and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Ashok Khubbar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Vivek Singal, Advocate for the insurance company. Mr. Kunal Garg, AAG, Haryana. 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. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for death of a lady, who was 40 years of age and the claimants were her children. The deceased was already a widow and she was said to be doing business in milk and cultivating one and half acres of land. The Tribunal took the monthly income at Rs.2,500/-, provided for 1/3rd deduction, took the extent of dependence at Rs.20,000/- per annum, adopted a multiplier of 16 and ascertained the loss due to dependence at Rs.3,20,000/-. It added Rs.10,000/- for attending last rites, provided for another sum of Rs.75,000/- towards medical expenses and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,05,000/-. FAO No.5695 of 2004 -2- 2. Learned counsel states that the judgment itself recorded the fact that a householder's services could be quantified as Rs.3,000/- per month as done in the judgment in Lata Wadhwa Vs. State of Bihar 2001(8) SCC 197 and would contend, therefore, that the assessment could not have been done for an amount which is less than even Rs.3,000/-. The comparison to Lata Wadhwa's case may not be appropriate in this case, for the Hon'ble Supreme Court had the definite evidence about the relative affluent status of the parties, many of whom were employees of TISCO and the Commission, which was appointed, determined the compensation on the basis of some approximations. There are different regimes of compensation through variuos legislations. It will be difficult to import one system into another. We have no homogenous approach to compensate victims or the families of deceased persons, who come by death or injury through motor accident, air, sea or railway accidents. Each has a different yardstick to determine compensation. 3. I am here examining whether the award of a Tribunal was erroneous and has omitted to apply any legal parameters which ought to be applied. I cannot tinker with an award for a few thousands here and there, for it is a reality that the quotient of satisfaction for a claimant in any death case is abysmally low. The truth is that death can never be compensated. Awarding financial reparation is the only known legal approach to the deprivation that a family suffers and there could be no conceit in the belief that there is a 100% reparation for death. In this case, the widow who was running FAO No.5695 of 2004 -3- the family dies leaving her children hapless. Any amount of compensation that Court determined could never fill the void for the children. The Court can not be drawn within the emotional peripheries any more than what the law allows for such determination. Even if the income cannot be taken as Rs.2500/- and it can be taken as Rs.3,000/-, in my view, it may not make a difference for the Tribunal was applying a 16 multiplier for a person who was 40 years while some decisions have suggested that the appropriate multiplier could be 15. If there is an increase in multiplicand, there may have to be a reduction in the multiplier. In my view, the overall compensation of Rs.4,05,000/-, under the circumstances, accords with what is just and it would require no modification. 4. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 01, 2010 Pankaj*