IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.790 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision:21.01.2011 Smt. Krishna Kumari and others ....Appellants versus The Hoshiarpur Express Transport Co. Hoshiarpur, through its Managing Director and others. ..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate, for the appellants. None for respondents 1 and 2. Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ---- 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 appeal is for enhancement of compensation for death of a person, who was a lawyer by profession. He was 54 years of age. The claimants were the widow and three major sons. The Tribunal while assessing the compensation relied on the income tax returns that had been filed and took the income at Rs.45,000/-, adopted a multiplier of 12, after making a deduction of 1/3rd and determined the compensation of Rs.3,60,000/-. The learned counsel pleads that the Tribunal must have taken Rs.50,000/- as contribution to the family and adopted a higher value of multiplier. It is also contended that there was evidence that FAO No.790 of 1992 (O&M) - 2 - the son had spent about Rs.50,000/- towards funeral expenses, transportation and medical expenses and the whole of the amounts have not been provided. 2. As regards the income, the details found in the income tax returns shall be the only basis and it is not possible to make an assumption that the income tax returns would have shown less income than what he was earning. The source of income that make up Rs.50,000/- must again be clearly established, for, if the income is generated from the deposits in a bank by way of interest or dividend for shares, they could only be taken as still available through the estate and it may not be possible to add them also towards the income. I will take, therefore, the assessment made as regards income by the Tribunal as correct and will retain the same. The choice of multiplier at 12 for a person, who was aged 54 years, cannot also be faulted, for, there are authorities that suggest for a lesser value for a person at that age. 3. The heads of claim that had not been considered are the claim of medical expenses which were proved through exhibits A9 to A34, which, according to the learned counsel, total up to Rs.6,000/-. The body had been transported from Hoshiarpur to Ludhiana which at that time would have involved in expenses of Rs.2,000/-. The funeral expenses, I would award at Rs.5,000/- and provide for a further sum of Rs.5,000/- for loss to estate. I will also make an additional provision for loss of consortium to the wife at Rs.5,000/-. On the whole, the amount of compensation that would require to be enhanced would be Rs.23,000/- and the amount over what has been determined already by the Tribunal FAO No.790 of 1992 (O&M) - 3 - shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. The additional amount shall be distributed amongst the claimants namely, the wife and sons in the ratio of 2:1:1:1 respectively. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 21.01.2011 sanjeev