IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.938 of 1988(O&M) Date of decision:01.02.2011 Smt. Neelam Rani and others ....Appellants versus Prahlad and others. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. R.A.Sheoran, Advocate, for the appellants. None for respondents 1, 3 and 4. Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ---- 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 a death of a junior operator, aged 29 years, leaving behind his widow and two minor children. The documentary proof that came on record was that he was earning Rs.1,137/-. The Tribunal, however, took the monthly income to be Rs.900/- provided for a dependency at Rs.600/- and adopted a multiplier of 16. I find no reason to take the income only at Rs.900/- when there was documentary proof of income at Rs.1,137/-. I will take the same, provide for a 1/3rd deduction and take the contribution to the family at Rs.758/- and adopt a multiplier of 17 instead of 16 as taken by FAO No.938 of 1988 (O&M) - 2 - the Tribunal. The loss of dependency will come to Rs.1,54,632/-. I will provide for Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the wife and Rs.2,500/- for each of the minor children. I will make a further addition of Rs.2,500/- for loss to estate and Rs.2,500/- for funeral expenses to take the total amount of compensation at Rs.1,69,632/-, which I will round off to Rs.1,70,000/-. The increase in compensation over what has been determined already by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. 2. The Insurance Company pleaded restriction of liability to Rs.1,50,000/- on policy terms and I, accordingly, restrict the liability of the Insurance Company to Rs.1,50,000/- with interest and the amount in excess of the same shall be borne by the owner of the vehicle Prahlad, who is first respondent in the appeal. The amount found entitled will be distributed amongst the claimants. 3. The appeal is allowed on the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 01.02.2011 sanjeev