IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1014 of 1988 (O&M) Date of decision:01.02.2011 Smt. Phoola Kumari alias Sharda and others ....Appellants versus Sumer Singh and others. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Satya Dev Bansal, Advocate, for the appellants. None for respondents 1 and 2. Mr. Ravinder Arora, 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 working in Kelvinator of India. The Tribunal provided for a 1/3rd deduction and adopted a multiplier of 16 and determined a compensation of Rs.84,400/-. While casting the liability on the Insurance Company, it accepted the claim of the insurer that it was liable only upto Rs.50,000/- and provided the excess of the amount over Rs.50,000/- to be borne by respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally, who are the owner and the driver. FAO No.1014 of 1988 (O&M) - 2 - 2. I will take the average income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- and having regard to the fact that the deceased was survived by the widow and three minor children, I will take the contribution to the family at 3/4th and take the monthly dependency at Rs.1,500/- and adopt a multiplier of 16 to take the loss of dependency at Rs.2,88,000/-. I will add Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the wife and Rs.2,500/- each to the three minor children. I will add another Rs.2,500/- for loss to estate and Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses, to find the total compensation of Rs.3,05,000/- as the amount payable. The amount in excess over what has been awarded by the Tribunal already shall attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. 3. Having regard to the finding already rendered that the Insurance Company's liability was restricted to Rs.50,000/-, the additional liability that has come through this award will be borne only by the owner and the driver, who are respectively respondents 1 and 2. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 01.02.2011 sanjeev