IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ^ MACA Nn.4n/7mn Date of Derisinn; August 12. 2010 SUNDERBPiATI &ORS AppeUants through Mr. S.N.Parashar, Advocate versus DEVI SINGH &ORS Respondents through Mr. Atul Nanda, Advocate with Ms. Sugandha & Mr. Nildiil Kohli, Advocates for respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the 'Digest'? REKHA SHARMA. T. (ORAL) , This appeal has been preferred by two married sons and two married daughters of deceased Smt. Kiran who died in a road accident. The learned Claims Tribunal in the absence of any evidence of the employment of the deceased assumed her income to be Rs.39,600/- per annum as was claimed by the appellants themselves. It is not disputed that the appellants were not financially dependent upon the deceased. She was only rendering household services to her two sons. Taking this fact into consideration, the Claims Tribunal MACA No.411/2010 Page 1 of 2 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified deducted50% ofthe assessedamounttowardsher personalexpenses which came to Rs.19,800/-per annum and after roundingof the same to Rs.20,000/- per annum apphed the multiplier of 13 so as to arrive at a total amount of compensation payable to the appellants which worked out to Rs.2.60 lacs. To this amount Rs.5,000/- was added towards loss to estate, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral e^enses. In all, the appellants have been awarded a sum of Rs.2.80 lacs along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit of cheque. Having regard to the fact that the appellants were not, in any way, financially dependent upon the deceased, I am of the view that they have been adeguately compensated for the services which the deceased could have rendered to them had she remained ahve. I find no infirmity in the order of the Claims Tribunal. The appeal has no merit. The same is dismissed. REKim SHARMA, J. AUGUST 12, 2010 ka MACANo.411/2010 Page 2 of 2