FAO NO.4290 of 2010 & another 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO NO.4290 of 2010 Date of decision:12.10.2011 United India Insurance Co.Ltd ...Appellant(s) Versus Ram Singh Verma and others ...Respondent(s) FAO No.7058 of 2010 Ram Singh and others ...Appellant(s) Versus Gurdas Chand @Gurdas Chander and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Gopal Mittal, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate, for the claimants-respondent Nos. No. 1 to 4. None for respondent Nos. 5 and 6. -.- JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. This judgment shall dispose of two appeals i.e. FAO No.4290 of 2010, preferred by the Insurance Company and FAO No.7058 of 2010, filed by the claimants/appellants as both the appeals have arisen out of a common award passed by the learned Tribunal. In FAO No.4290 of 2010, the only argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that according to the norms laid down by FAO NO.4290 of 2010 & another 2 Hon'ble the Suprme Court in Shakti Devi V. New India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., JT 2010 (13) S.C.103, the learned Tribunal wrongly applied the multiplier of 18. From the perusal of the case file, it emerges that the deceased was a bachelor and died at the age of about 22 years. The learned Tribunal, after deducting personal expenses of the deceased, assessed his annual income at `48,150 and applied the multiplier of 18. Thus, the compensation arrived at `8,66,700/-. Besides this, `10,000/- were awarded towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. It is not disputed that the deceased was a bachelor. He left behind his parents. In Shakti Devi's case (supra), it has been observed that in a case where the age of the claimants is higher than the age of the deceased, the age of claimants and not the age of the deceased has to be taken into account for the capitalization of the lost dependency. In the fact situation, this Court feels that the learned Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 18, whereas it should be 15 keeping in view the age of the parents. Accordingly, the multiplier is reduced from 18 to 15. Thus, the compensation comes to `7,22,250/- (48,150 x 15). As regards FAO No.7058 of 2010, the only point raised is that a meager sum of `10,000/- has been granted by the learned Tribunal towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. The deceased was of 22 years and left behind his old parents. It was a great shock to his parents. Therefore, this Court is of the view that awarding of an additional sum of `10,000/- towards these heads would meet the ends of justice. As such, the Insurance Company is granted rights to recover the excess amount i.e. `1,34,450/- (8,66,700 + 10,000- 7,22,250) from the FAO NO.4290 of 2010 & another 3 claimants. In view of the above, both the appeals are partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. 12.10.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) Mks JUDGE