FAO No.840 of 1995 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.840 of 1995 DATE OF DECISION: December 22, 2010 RAJ RANI & OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS TARSEM GARG & OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement. Yes/No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? Yes/No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? Yes/No ---- PRESENT: MR. K.S. SIDHU, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR. N.S. SIDHU, ADVOCATE AND MR. G.S. SIDHU, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANTS. MR. SUVIR DEWAN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2. NONE FOR THE REMAINING RESPONDENTS. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for death of a person who was a Private Secretary in a Government employment. His salary was shown to be `5400/- and the claimants were widow, son and a minor daughter. The Tribunal took the extent of dependency at `3500/- and take notice of the fact that the he would serve for another 1 year and 7 months, took the contribution to the family @ `3500/- and after the projected date of retirement took the contribution a `750/- per month. This in my view is erroneous. The choice of multiplier provided under the Act, as well as explained through several decisions has bearing to the normal life FAO No.840 of 1995 -2- span and the relevance of employment shall be for the salary earned and what he could have contributed at the time of his death. There is no need for any Court to split the number of years of service and provide for any reduction in the period after service. A man after retirement does not become a liability and he still contributes substantially to the family and in the manner of determination of compensation several approximations are made. A homogeneity in approach will be surrendered if we introduce new concepts like reduction of contribution for the homely retired life and to make provisions of a lesser contribution for family after the period of retirement. I will take `3500/- as the extent of dependency as determined by the Tribunal, take the annual dependency at `42000/- and provide for a multiplier of 9 on the basis of the age of the deceased and find that the extent of loss of dependency at `3,78,000/-. I will add `5000/- towards loss of consortium to the wife and provide for further sum of `5000/- towards loss of estate, funeral expenses. The amount that shall become payable will be `3,88,000/-. The amount in excess of what has been determined by the Tribunal will also attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The liability and the manner of apportionment amongst the claimants shall be in the manner determined by the Tribunal. 2. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. December 22, 2010 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE