IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.340 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.12.2010 Mohinder Kaur and another ....Appellants versus Prem Wanti and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: None for the appellants. None for respondents 1 to 3. Mr. R.C.Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ---- 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. 1. There is no appearance for the appellants. It is a claim for enhancement of compensation for death of a person in motor accident. Tools for determination of compensation for death have gravitated to certitude, thanks to Schedule-II in Motor Vehicles Act to the extent to which it is applicable and in the manner suggested by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another-2009 ACJ 1298. I do not want to dismiss the case for default of appearance of the counsel and hasten to dispose of the case on merits on established legal parameters. FAO No.340 of 1994 (O&M) - 2 - 2. The claimants are parents of the deceased, who was a driver, aged over 20. The Tribunal took the annual earning to be Rs.10,000/-, calculated the dependency at Rs.5,000/- and adopted a multiplier of 15 and awarded Rs.75,000/-. I will take the income annually at Rs.15,000/-, make a deduction of 1/3rd for personal expenses and take a multiplier of 17 as per Schedule-II and take the loss due to dependency at Rs.1,70,000/-, add Rs.5,000/- towards loss to estate and funeral expenses and determine a total compensation at Rs.1,75,000/-. 3. The amount in excess over what is granted by the Tribunal shall attract 6% interest per annum and the award shall be shared equally between the claimants and enforceable against the insurer. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 23.12.2010 sanjeev