F.A.O.NO. 436 OF 1998 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 436 OF 1998 Date of decision:13th October, 2010 Neena Gupta and others .......Appellants Versus Raj Roop and another .........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. V.Ramswarup, Advocate, for the Delhi Transport Corporation Delhi. 1.. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?Yes/No K.KANNAN,J.(Oral) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of the claim for compensation. The Tribunal had already awarded Rs. 5,76,000/- to the widow and two minor sons on account of death of one Raj Kumar aged 39 years. It appears that the matter went for settlement before the Lok Adalat an increase after joint discussion with both parties was suggested for Rs. 45,400/-, over and above the amount determined by the Tribunal. The suggestion was entered by the Bench of Lok Adalat on 4.04.2003. However, it did not take effect to operate as a lawful F.A.O.NO. 436 OF 1998 2 decree due to some administrative reasons and on the ground that the Delhi Transport Corporation had not accepted the proposal and it was merely an offer given by the Lok Adalat. I therefore, examine the case on own merit. 2. I find it as a matter of record that the deceased was getting a salary of Rs. 6,300/- that included Rs. 1,500/- as house rent allowance. If the house rent allowance were to be deducted and 1/3rd cut for personal expense were to be made, the compensation payable would be Rs. 6,14,400/-, this was an amount which was Rs. 45,400/- over the above the award. The Lok Adalat had also suggested 12% interest from the date of filing the claim petition. I have examined it independently and I find that an amount of Rs. 45,400/- could be awarded in excess, over and above what has already been determined by the Tribunal. The appeal restricts the rate of interest at 6% per annum for the increase borne on the award from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 13th October, 2010 Shivani Kaushik