IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.296 of 1993 Date of decision: 17.12.2008 Amir Kaur and others ......Appellants Versus Anil Kumar ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Upender Prashar, Advocate for the appellants. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. This is claimants' appeal for grant of enhanced compensation by modifying the impugned award of the Tribunal. One Surinder Singh died in an accident on 7.11.1991 due to rash and negligent driving of Truck No.PAT-6887 owned and driven by respondent No.1. At the time of accident age of the deceased was 56 years and his carry home salary was Rs.2,779/-. The claimants are widow, daughter and sons of Surinder Singh(deceased). The Tribunal determined the annual dependency of the claimants at the rate of Rs.18,000/- per annum and applied a multiplier of 10 and granted a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- to the claimants. It has been vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that keeping in view the fact that there were four dependents, the determination of expenses which were supposed to be incurred by the deceased upon himself, has been made on the higher side and at the most in this case, on this account, a cut of ¼th should have been applied and in that way, the annual dependency should be determined at Rs.25,200/- and therefore, the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants. However, I find no merit in the contentions raised by him. At the time of death, the deceased was 56 years of age and was due to retire after two years. His FAO No.296 of 1993 -2- income was bound to decrease after retirement. Furthermore, at the time of death, the age of the daughters was 22 and 20 years and they were no longer to remain dependent upon the deceased for their livelihood on completion of their studies. The son who was around 18 years at the time of death of the deceased was also likely to contribute towards the income of the deceased. Even otherwise also, after determining the annual dependency, a suitable multiplier is to be applied by taking into consideration the number of years of the dependency of the various dependents, the number of years by which the life of the deceased was cut short and the various imponderable factors such as early natural death of the deceased, his becoming incapable of supporting the dependents due to illness or any other natural handicap or calamity, the prospects of the remarriage of the widow, the coming up of age of the dependents and their developing independent source of income as well as the pecuniary benefits which might accrue to the dependents on account of the death of the person concerned. Keeping in view the above principle, the multiplier of 10 applied in this case seems to be on the higher side. Compensation cannot be assessed in a strait-jacket formula and some element of guess work is always there. Thus, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and adequate. No interference in the same is called for. Dismissed. December 17, 2008 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE