FAO No.2103 of 1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2103 of 1994 Date of Decision.16.11.2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Mandi (H.P.) through the Administrative Officer, Regional Office, Sector 34, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Smt. Nirmala Devi widow of Shri Harkesh Kumar and others ......Respondents 2. FAO No.2106 of 1994 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Mandi (H.P.) through the Administrative Officer, Regional Office, Sector 34, Chandigarh ......Appellant Versus Smt. Parkasho Devi wife of Shri Krishan Dayal and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. V. Ramswaroop, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. 3. FAO No.255 of 1995 Smt. Nirmala Devi wd/o Harkesh Kumar alias Rakesh Kumar d/o Babu Ram, resident of Ward No.2, Kurali, Distt. Ropar ......Appellant Versus Narotam Dutt son of Sh. Sukh Ram resident of village Nelti, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. and others ......Respondents 4. FAO No.313 of 1995 Parkasho Devi w/o Krishan Dayal @ Krishan Chand and another ......Appellants Versus Narotam Dutt son of Sh. Sukh Ram resident of village Nelti, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. V. Ram Swaroop, Advocate for the insurance company. FAO No.2103 of 1994 -2- 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. FAO No.2103 and 2106 of 1994 are the appeals by the insurance company relating to death of a person where the claimants were widow and parents respectively. The widow and parents have themselves come on independent appeals for enhancement in FAO Nos.255 and 313 of 1995. 2. As far as the insurance company was concerned, the contention was that the driving licence was not valid and effective. It had not been established at the trial and I cannot fault the Tribunal for the utter lack of evidence given by the insurer when the burden of proof was on the insurer to establish that there was any breach of terms of policy. There was not even an issue relating to the driving licence. The appeals by the insurance company are, therefore, dismissed. 3. The case would survive for consideration for quantum and the Tribunal had taken the income to be Rs.1,000/- for the deceased who was a Cleaner and adopted a multiplier of 18 after taking the extent of dependence at Rs.700/- per month. The total compensation arrived at was Rs.1,51,000/-. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants would argue that even the statutory minimum of Rs.15,000/- was not taken by the Tribunal. I will accommodate to such a plea and take and take the annual income to be Rs.15,000/- FAO No.2103 of 1994 -3- and the contribution to the family at Rs.10,000/- after taking a deduction of 1/3rd. The accident had taken place on 9.5.1992 and he died after two days. There was evidence that he had been originally taken to a hospital at Khanna and later shifted to Patiala. I would provide for Rs.5,000/- as medical expenses and Rs.3,000/- as transport expenses. There has been no award for loss of consortium as well as for loss to estate or funeral expenses. They shall also be provided at the rates specified in Schedule II. The tabulation of compensation under the various heads are brought out hereunder:- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 29 Occupation Cleaner in a truck Claimants Widow, Parents Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 1000 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 15000 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3rd 5 Multiplicand 700x12 10000 6 Multiplier 18 18 7 Loss of dependence 1,51,200 1,80,000 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation -- 8000 9 Loss of Consortium -- 5000 10 Loss to estate -- 2500 11 Funeral expenses -- 2000 Total 1,51,000 1,97,500 4. The total amount of compensation will be rounded off to Rs.2 lacs. The appeals are allowed to the above extent and the amount in excess over what has been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of FAO No.2103 of 1994 -4- payment. The portion of the increased amount shall be in the same proportion in which it was worked out between the widow and the parents before the Tribunal. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE November 16, 2010 Pankaj*