F.A.O.NO. 1841 OF 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 1841 OF 2009 Date of decision:6th October, 2010 Nirmala and others .......Appellants Versus Chimana Ram and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. S.K.Verma, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate, for the Insurance Company. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal is by the claimants seeking for enhancement against the compensation of Rs. 4,23,000/- granted for death of the bread winner of the family, who was aged 35 years. He was said to be doing business in milk and gave no documentary evidence of proof of his income. On the other hand, learned counsel contended that he was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. The Tribunal took his monthly income at Rs. 3,000/-, provided for deduction of Rs. 1,000/- for personal expenses and adopted a multiplier of 17. Learned counsel states that he had 6 dependents, therefore, as per the decision of the F.A.O.NO. 1841 OF 2009 2 Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009) 6 SCC 121, the deduction must have been only 1/4th. I would take the dependency at 3/4th of his income and take the contribution to the family as Rs. 2,250/- for a person who was aged 35 years. As per the decision in Sarla Verma's case(supra) the multiplier will be 16 and the loss due to dependency would be Rs. 4,32,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium. The grievance of the claimant is that there was no provision for transportation expenses and loss to estate. The amount of Rs. 10,000/- for funeral expenses ought to cover the same. The total amount that will become payable is Rs. 4,47,000/-. The enhancement shall be of Rs. 24,000/- over the award already granted will bear interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of hearing. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 6th October, 2010 Shivani Kaushik