FAO No.7171 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7171 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision. 29.04.2011 Banarsi Devi @ Banaso Devi widow of Om Parkash and others ......Appellants Versus Shamsher Singh son of Shri Rati Ram and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Kulwant Singh Dhanora, Advocate for the appellants. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No. -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for death of a person who was aged 50 years. The claimants were widow, two major sons and the mother. He was said to be engaged in electric works and vending electrical equipments in a shop. The contention was that he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month and paying a rent of Rs.2300/- for his shop. In the absence of any documentary evidence relating to the income that he was earning by running a shop, the Tribunal took the net income to be Rs.5,000/- without making deduction for rent and took the contribution to the family at Rs.29,960/- per annum, adopted a multiplier of 13 suitable to the age of the deceased, assessed the loss of dependency at Rs.5,19,480/- and added medical expenses and the conventional heads of claim for loss of consortium to the wife as well as for funeral expenses. I do not find any error in the assessment of compensation by the Tribunal. The overall compensation FAO No.7171 of 2010 (O&M) -2- determined at Rs.7,11,640/- is just compensation and I find no reason to interfere with the same. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants states that an application for amendment of the decree was filed pointing out the fact that the sons are not minors but they are major sons. The application appears to have been dismissed on the ground that the appeal is already pending before the High Court. While drafting the decree the Tribunal shall carry out the mistake and refer to the sons as majors. 3. With this modification, the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 29, 2011 Pankaj*