FAO No.3297 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3297 of 2010 Date of decision: 27.9.2011 Randhir Singh and another ...Appellant(s) Versus Gurcharan Singh and another ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Deepali S.Pabla, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.J.S.Saneta, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.2. -.- JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. CM No.15393 of 2010 No reply to the application for condonation of delay has been filed. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 57 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. Main case The claimants are the parents of the deceased, who was bachelor and aged 21 years. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the multiplier of 8 applied by the learned Tribunal is against the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi FAO No.3297 of 2010 2 Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the multiplier applied is on the higher side and the cases wherein the compensation is claimed by the parents on account of death of their unmarried son, the deduction would be made to the extent of 50% and not 1/3rd as applied in the instant case. The claimants asserted that the deceased had been earning `20,000/- per month. The learned Tribunal, in the absence of any positive proof, assessed the earning of the deceased as `3,000/- per month. The learned Tribunal, after deducting 1/3rd income of the deceased towards personal expenses, assessed the monthly dependency of the deceased as `2000/- on the basis of fixed daily wages as prevalent at that time and assessed his annual income as `24,000/-. After applying the multiplier of 8, awarded the compensation of `1,92,000/- to the claimants. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the multiplier of 18 should have been applied keeping in view the age of the deceased has no substance and thus is rejected. In a case where the age of the claimant is higher than the age of the deceased, the age of claimant and not the age of the deceased has to be taken into account for the capitalization of the lost dependency. In the instant case the age of the deceased was of 21 years and the age of the claimants fall in the age group of 41-45 years. Accordingly, the multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is enhanced from 8 to 14 keeping in view the norms laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma's case (supra). As regards the personal expenses, since the deceased was not married, this Court is of the view that 50% should be treated as the personal FAO No.3297 of 2010 3 and living expenses of the bachelor. Accordingly, the deductions towards personal expenses is increased from 1/3rd to 1/2 and thus the annual dependency comes to `18,000 (3000x1/2x 12). After applying the enhanced multiplier of 14, the compensation comes to `2,52,000/- (18,000x14). Thus, the enhanced compensation works out to `60,000/- (2,52,000-1,92,000), which shall be paid, in the manner indicated in the impugned award, within 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If the payment of enhanced amount is not made within the stipulated period, the same shall carry interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing the present appeal till it is paid. In view of above, the present appeal is partly allowed with the modification indicated above. 27.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) mks JUDGE