IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cross Objection No.22-CII of 1999 in/and FAO No.1428 of 1998 (O&M) Date of decision:01.03.2011 Ram Kishan and another ....Appellants versus Vidya Rani and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ajay Saini, Advocate, for the respondents 1 to 6. Mr. V. Ramswaroop, Advocate, for respondent No.10. ---- 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 by the owner and the driver of the jeep that had been involved in a collision with a tractor trolley that had been insured with New India Assurance Company. In a claim emanating from the representatives of the deceased passenger, the Tribunal held that the accident had taken place by the negligent driving of the driver of the jeep. The finding was recorded on the evidence of PW1 and PW2 and the statement contained in the FIR when a case had been registered against the driver of the jeep. The evidence of the driver of the jeep denying negligence was rejected by the Tribunal as a mere bald denial Cross Objection No.22-CII of 1999 in/and FAO No.1428 of 1998 (O&M) - 2 - that did not properly advert to how the accident had taken place. The finding of the Tribunal has been rendered on a due consideration of all the oral evidence placed and I will, therefore, not find any reason to take a different view. 2. Even as regards the quantum, the deceased was 60 years of age and taking the income at Rs.1,500/-, the Tribunal fixed the dependency of the family at Rs.1,000/- and adopting a multiplier of 8, the Court assessed the compensation at Rs.96,000/-. There is a cross objection for enhancement of claim. The learned counsel points out that in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another- 2009(6) SCC 121, the appropriate multiplier ought to be 9. I adopt the same and find the loss of dependency at Rs.1,08,000/-. The claimants were widow and 3 sons. I will make a further provision of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow, Rs.2,500/- for loss to estate and Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses. In all, the total compensation will be Rs.1,17,500/-. The amount in excess over what has been already determined by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. The additional amount shall be distributed amongst the claimants equally. The liability shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal. The cross objection is allowed to the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 01.03.2011 sanjeev