FAO No.3177 of 1999 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3177 of 1999 Date of Decision. 12.10.2010 Kishan alias Keshav son of Sh. Bhagga Ram, resident of village Mukarpur, Post Office Beer Mathan, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra ......Appellant Versus Swaran Singh son of Sher Singh and others ....Respondents 2. FAO No.3178 of 1999 Sonia Devi daughter of Shri Baljit Singh and others ......Appellants Versus Swaran Singh son of Sher Singh and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. Ajit Atri, Advocate for Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Suvir Dewan, Advocate for the insurance company. None for other respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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. These two cases arise out of a motor accident where the issue for adjudication is only the compensation claimable. 2. In FAO No.3177 of 1999, the claimant had fracture of the nasal bone and lost three teeth. He had incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.2584/-, which the Tribunal took as it was and provided for FAO No.3177 of 1999 -2- compensation of another sum of Rs.8000/- towards pain and suffering and granted a compensation of Rs.10,594/-. A fracture of a nasal bone, which is a very sensitive organ ought to have caused enormous pain and suffering. A man breathes through nose and inconvenience to a frontal organ that impairs the breathing and creates an ugly appearance ought to have been taken a circumstance where appropriate compensation should have been given. Even across the globe spiting a person by any injury in the nose is regarded as the most serious injury. Even in a boxing ring a hit on the nose scores to an opponent the highest point. He has also lost three teeth and I would, therefore, provide for a fracture of the nasal bone and for loss of teeth, an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for pain and suffering. I would add the medical expenses at another Rs.3,000/- and take the loss of earning for a period when he could not have effectively carried his work of vending another Rs.5,000/-. In all the sum that will in excess would be Rs.33,000/-. The amount in excess of what has been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. With reference to the other case in FAO No.3178 of 199, the deceased was a 32 years old hawker, who was said to be earning Rs.2,000/-. The grievance of the claimants is that they were five dependents and the Tribunal ought to have not provided 1/3rd deduction. It was also contended that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal was 12 when it should have been 16. I would accede to the plea on behalf of the appellant and would take the contribution to FAO No.3177 of 1999 -3- the family as Rs.1500/-. The annual dependence would be Rs.18000/- and if I adopt a multiplier of 16, the extent of loss of dependence would be taken as Rs.2,88,000/-. I would add another Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the wife and Rs.2500/- as the loss of love and affection to each one of the minor children. I would provide also for loss to estate and funeral expenses a further sum of Rs.5,000/-. In all the total sum payable would be Rs.3,08,000/-. The amount assessed in excess of what has been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 4. It is seen in both the cases that the insurance company has been exonerated and the liability has been cast on the drivers and owners of the vehicle. As far as the liability of the respective drivers is concerned, the respective owners shall become vicariously liable and the right of enforcement will be provided against the owners of the vehicles only, who were respondents No.5 and 8 in the appeal. 5. Both the appeals are allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 12, 2010 Pankaj*