FAO No.89 of 1999 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.89 of 1999 DATE OF DECISION: February 21, 2011 RAM LAL SETHI AND OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS RAJINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? Yes/No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? Yes/No ---- PRESENT: MR. B.S. WALIA, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT. NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.1. MR. KUNAL GARG, AAG, HARYANA FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim of compensation at the instance of the husband and two children for death of the wife of the first claimant. The Tribunal took the value of the householder's services at `15,000/-, provided for a deduction of 1/3rd and took the contribution to the family at `10,000/- by applying a multiplier of 11. I will not find any mistake in any of the computations, except that the Tribunal did not provide for conventional heads of claims as contemplated under Schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act. The same shall be provided and tabulated as below:- Fatal Accidents Age: 52 Occupation Housewife Claimants Husband, 2 children Heads of Claim Tribunal High Court Sr.No. Amount ` Amount ` 1. Annual Income 15000 15000 FAO No.89 of 1999 -2- Fatal Accidents 2. Add % of increase 30%/50% Nil 3. Deduction (1/2,1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3 4. Multiplicand 10,000 10,000 5. Multiplier 11 11 6. Loss of Dependence 7. Medical Expenses 8. Loss of Consortium + loss of love and affection 10,000 9. Loss to Estate 2500 10. Funeral Expenses 2000 Total 1,10,000/- 1,24,500/- 2. It is, therefore, a very marginal increase of `14,500/- over the compensation awarded. It will attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The additional amount shall be payable to the husband. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. February 21, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE