FAO No. 1620 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 1620 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.1.2011 United India Insurance Company .. Appellant v. Malkiat Kaur and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Gopal Mittal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ramneek Vasudeva, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 7. Mr. Salim Malik, Advocate for respondent No. 8. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that deceased- Manjit Singh, who was employed as a driver with respondent No. 8, had in fact died due to poisoning, as in the post-mortem report, it was found that he had consumed chlorocompound group of insecticide. Death in these circumstances cannot be said to be during the course of employment, as it can be a case of suicide. He further submitted that in the evidence, it has come that he was being paid ` 3,000/- per month as driver and ` 1,000/- per month for looking after the buses during off duty hours. At the time of death, he was merely looking after the bus and not driving the same, accordingly the assessment of compensation had to be on the basis of his income earned for that period considering the same to be ` 1,000/- per month. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is not in dispute that Manjit Singh, died while he was in the bus. There is no material on record to suggest that alleged chlorocompound group of insecticide was consumed by him or some body else had poisoned FAO No. 1620 of 2010 [2] him. It is a clear case of death during the course of employment. His income cannot be considered merely at ` 1,000/- per month. In fact, he was being paid ` 4,000/- per month. It is only that some bifurcation was made for driving and for looking after the bus at the time of parking. The assessment of compensation has to be while calculating his income at ` 4,000/- per month. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Nothing has been produced on record by the Insurance Company to suggest that chlorocompound group of insecticide had been consumed by Manjit Singh himself and it was a case of suicide. In the absence of that evidence on record, no illegality can be found with the finding recorded by the Commissioner that it was a case of death during the course of employment. Even the assessment of compensation by taking his income at ` 4,000/- per month also cannot be faulted with as it was composite of salary being paid by the employer to the deceased, which was bifurcated as ` 3,000/- per month as driver and ` 1,000/- per month additionally for looking after the bus, when off the road. When a person dies, his total income is to be considered from that source, as the family is to be compensated for the loss they suffer on account of the death of an earning member of the family. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 7.1.2011 mk