IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3185 of 2003 (O&M) Date of decision:19.01.2011 Kirandeep Kaur ....Appellant versus Basu Dev Sharma and others ..Respondents II. FAO No.3186 of 2003 (O&M) Kirandeep Kaur and others ....Appellants versus Basu Dev Sharma and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate, for the appellant/s. Mr. Madan Lal, Advocate, for Mr. Raman Mahajan, Advocate, for respondents 1 and 2. Mr. Pradeep Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ---- 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. Both the appeals arise out of the same accident where the claimants were the wife and children of one of the deceased and other deceased, being a child, aged 1 year of the first claimant through her deceased husband. In relation to a claim for compensation for death of child, aged 1 year, which is the subject matter of appeal in FAO No.3185 FAO No.3185 of 2003 (O&M) - 2 - of 2003, the Tribunal had awarded Rs.1 lakh. Determination of compensation for death of a child is invariably in the realm of conjecture but I have not the special circumstances that existed in the cases in M.S.Grewal Versus Deep Chand Sood-2002(1) RCR (Civil) 214 and in Lata Wadhwa Vs. State of Bihar-2001(8) SCC 197 where depending on the economic and social status of the parents and the prospects of child attaining to same level, the Court had granted compensation in the range of Rs.3,40,000/- in Lata Wadhwa and Rs.5 lakh in M.S.Grewal. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1 lakh and I will provide for an additional amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment for loss of a child to a parent and a sibling for the other claimants. The appeal in FAO No.3185 of 2003 is allowed to the above extent. 2. As regards the claim for compensation in FAO No.3186 of 2003, the deceased was said to be engaged in buying, selling and repairing scooters and acting as a sub agent for bajaj chetak scooters. A witness was examined to say that he was an employee under the deceased and he was being paid Rs.5,000/- per month and the deceased himself was earning not less than Rs.10,000/-. It was also in evidence that the business was started in June, 1988 and the accident itself had taken place in December, 1999 and later the business was closed. While assessing this contention, the Tribunal found that no documentary evidence at all had been placed and found it most unlikely that in the case of a business as a sub-agent, there could be no accounts to prove his involvement in the business and the income details in such a business. Under such a FAO No.3185 of 2003 (O&M) - 3 - circumstance, the Tribunal took the income to be Rs.3,000/-, the contribution to the family at Rs.2,000/- and after adopting a multiplier of 16, the Tribunal had awarded Rs.3,91,000/- that included Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks for reappraisal of the award in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another- 2009 ACJ 1298. According to him, there were 4 dependents and the Tribunal must have provided for 1/4th deduction instead of 1/3rd. I accede to the plea and take Rs.2,250/- as the contribution to the family after deducting 1/4th for personal expenses and adopt a multiplier of 16 and find the loss of dependency at Rs.4,32,000/-. I will retain the provision for loss of consortium to the wife, but I will also provide for Rs.5,000/- to each one of the minor children for loss of love and affection for the parents and also provide for Rs.5,000/- towards loss to estate. I will retain the provision for funeral expenses awarded at Rs.2,000/- and find the total compensation at Rs.4,54,500/-. The amount in excess over what has been determined already by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. The increase in compensation shall avail only to the widow and two minor children. The liability amongst the respondents shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 19.01.2011 sanjeev