FAO No.774 of 1989 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.774 of 1989 DATE OF DECISION: February 16, 2011 JAILA SINGH AND OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS HAZARI LAL AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No ---- PRESENT: NONE FOR THE APPELLANTS. NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1, 2 AND 4 TO 10. MR. INDERJIT SHARMA, ADVOCATE AND MR. PARDEEP BEDI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation where the insurance company has been exonerated and the liability had been fastened on the owner and the driver of the truck which had carried the deceased alongwith several other persons to a marriage party. The deceased was 50 years of age and the claimants were husband and children of the deceased. In the manner of determining the compensation before the Tribunal, the evidence was that she was doing milk business and was earning `1400/-. The Tribunal found that the accident had taken place only on account of negligent driving of Mohinder Singh who was the driver of the truck HYN-2665 when it turned turtle, but still awarded `15,000/- as compensation under No-fault basis. It is not very clear from the judgement FAO No.774 of 1989 -2- as to why the entitlement of the claimants were pegged down only to `15,000/- when the assessment ought to have been made under Section 166. There had been a justification for exoneration of the insurance company, since the claimants were passengers in a goods carriage and they were not entitled to secure a claim against the insurer. 2. Even if the proof of an avocation as a milk-maid was not approved, the value of household services itself could have been assessed at `1400/-, provide for deduction of `400/- and take the contribution to the family at 1000/- per month. I will take a multiplier of 13 and take the dependency at `1,56,000/-. I will also add `5000/- towards loss of consortium to the husband and `2500/- for each of the minor children. The compensation is reworked and tabulated as under:- Fatal Accidents Age: 50 Occupation Claimants Heads of Claim Tribunal High Court Sr.No. Amount ` Amount ` 1. Annual Income 1400 2. Add % of increase 30%/50% Nil 3. Deduction (1/2,1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 400 4. Multiplicand 300 x 12 1000 x 12 5. Multiplier 13 6. Loss of Dependence 1,56,000 7. Medical Expenses 8. Loss of Consortium + loss of love and affection 10,000 9. Loss to Estate 10. Funeral Expenses 2000 Total /- 1,68,000/- 3. The amount in excess over what has been determined by the FAO No.774 of 1989 -3- Tribunal shall attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The amount shall be distributed between all the claimants equally. 4. The liability shall be on the respondents No.1 and 2, namely, the owner and the driver. 5. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. February 16, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE