F.A.O.No.2718 of 2009 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... F.A.O.No.2718 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on : August 11, 2009 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ... Appellant VERSUS Smt.Kavita Devi and another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Amit Rawal, Advocate for the appellant. A.N.JINDAL, J.- This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against the award dated 18.2.2009 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul, whereby, a sum of Rs.15,10,000/- has been awarded on account of compensation on the death of Vijender Singh @ Bijender Singh in a motor vehicle accident. Counsel for the appellant has made two-fold arguments; firstly that the First Information Report does not contain the number of the alleged offending tractor and the name of its driver, therefore, the rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the said tractor is not proved; secondly, that the Tribunal should have taken into consideration the net income of the deceased and not the gross income for assessment of compensation. and that in any case, it could not add Rs.2000/- more on the F.A.O.No.2718 of 2009 (O&M) [ 2 ] basis of the recommendations of VIth Pay Commission. While dealing with the first contention, it is observed that Raghbir Singh (PW1) while appearing in the witness box stated in so many words that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Tractor No.HR35C-8090 by respondent No.5 (respondent No.1 before the Tribunal). His statement finds corroboration from the post mortem report. It is a settled law that the FIR should not be seen as an encyclopedia of the case. PW1 Raghbir Singh, the eye witness also stood the test of cross- examination, therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve his version. Now, coming to the second contention regarding the assessment of the compensation, there is no denying a fact that the deceased was an army personnel and had been getting salary of Rs.8046/-. The salary statements (Ex.P3 to P9) were proved on the record. The deceased was 22 years old at the time of the accident and he had a prospective career. Certainly, his income was likely to be increased with the acceptance of the VIth Pay Commission recommendations, therefore, the Tribunal was justified in assessing his income at Rs.10,000/- per month. Resultantly, finding no merit in the appeal, the same is dismissed. August 11, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE