FAO No.1697 of 1996 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1697 of 1996 Date of Decision.14.12.2010 Jaswant Kaur widow of Baldev Singh aged 48 years and others ......Appellants Versus Union of India through its Administrator, Chandigarh and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Kulvir Dalal, Advocate for Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Advocate and Mr. A.P. Setia, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. None for the respondents. No.4 and 5. 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. The claim is for enhancement of compensation for death of 1st claimant's husband, who was said to be a farm supervisor and was making additional income by selling milk. At the trial, the evidence was led through Kamaljit, PW2, who was said to be the Chief Law Officer in M/s Pearls Green Forest Ltd. He produced the salary certificate and also gave evidence but this was not believed by the Tribunal on the ground that there was no authenticated proof of the fact that he had been appointed as a farm supervisor. There must be a good ground for rejection of any independent evidence and before a FAO No.1697 of 1996 -2- Court launches upon a characterization that it is fabricated evidence, it must follow the trend of cross-examination to see whether such an inference was possible. If an independent evidence is brought and a person, who is a respectable Chief Law Officer gives evidence, it will be too risky to dump his entire evidence as fabricated. I will, therefore, take the evidence produced on behalf of the claimant that he was being paid Rs.4500/- per month as worthy of acceptance and allow for the document to be sufficient to establish the income status. I will make a deduction of 1/3rd and take the contribution to the family at Rs.3,000/- per month and annual dependence at Rs.36,000/-. The Tribunal had applied a multiplier of 10 and instead of that I will apply a multiplier of 13 for a person who was said to be 50 years of age. The amount of loss due to the extent of dependence shall be Rs.4,68,000/- and I will also add Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.5,000/- towards loss to estate and Rs.2500/- towards funeral expenses. In all, the amount of compensation that will become payable would be Rs.4,80,500/-. The amount in excess over what has already been awarded by the Tribunal will attract interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The amount will be distributed amongst all the claimants equally. The liability amongst the respondents shall be as determined by the Tribunal. 2. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE December 14, 2010 Pankaj*