FAO No.1225 of 1992 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1225 of 1992 Date of Decision.16.11.2010 Shahsi Bala widow of Shri Krishan Gopal Bhutani and others ......Appellants Versus Khalid son of Shri Waris Khan and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. P.C. Goel, Advocate for for the appellant. Mr. V. Chaudhari, Advocate for the insurance company. 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. For the death of a person, who was aged 45 years and was working as Accountant, the claimants were awarded a compensation of Rs.1,92,000/-. The Tribunal took the income of the deceased to be Rs.1500/-, adopted a deduction of 1/3rd and applied a multiplier of 16 to award Rs.1,92,000/-. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that evidence had been placed and exhibited as P-1 and P-2 to show that the deceased was earning Rs.1,200/- for his services at the Modern Service Station and Rs.800/- for his services at the Lajpat Rai and Sons and the documents had also been spoken to by the witness. The income should have been Rs.2,000/- and not Rs.1,500 as taken by the Tribunal. The learned counsel would also contend that there had FAO No.1225 of 1992 -2- been no provision made for loss of consortium or love and affection for the minor child. It had not also awarded the conventional heads of claim for loss to estate and funeral expenses. I will accede to the pleas of the counsel for the appellant and take the income to be Rs.2,000/- and provide also for loss of consortium and loss of love and affection @ Rs.5,000/- each for the wife and minor daughter. I will provide Rs.5,000/- towards loss to estate and Rs.2500 for funeral expenses. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would plead that the choice of multiplier was taken as 16, which was high and there was no justification for making any enhancement. I would reduce the multiplier which was taken as 16 and take it as 14 and take the income as Rs.2,000/- instead of Rs.15,000/- as taken by the Tribunal. I would tabulate the amount of compensation as under:- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 45 years Occupation Accountant Claimants Widow, son and minor daughter Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 1500 2000 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 24000 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3rd 1/3rd 5 Multiplicand 12000 16000 6 Multiplier 16 14 7 Loss of dependence 1,92,000 2,24,000 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation -- 9 Loss of Consortium -- 10000 10 Loss to estate -- 5000 FAO No.1225 of 1992 -3- FATAL ACCIDENTS 11 Funeral expenses -- 2500 Total 1,92,000 2,41,500 4. The total amount of compensation that would become payable would be Rs.2,41,500/- and the amount in excess over what has been already awarded shall attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition to the date of payment. The enhancement portion of the amount shall be payable equally to the widow and child. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE November 16, 2010 Pankaj*