FAO No.262 of 1992 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.262 of 1992 DATE OF DECISION: January 20, 2011 SUDHARSHAN & ANOTHER ...APPELLANT VERSUS HARYANA ROADWAYS CHANDIGARH & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement. Yes 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? Yes ---- PRESENT: NONE FOR THE APPEALLANTS. MR. KUNAL GARG, AAG, HARYANA. NONE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3. MR. PAUL S.SAINI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for the death of a householder aged 25 years. There is no representation for the appellant, but I do not want to dismiss it for default or adjourn the case that has stood for consideration for assessment of compensation for death for nearly 2 decades. I proceed to examine the case on merits with the assistance of the counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. A young lady had lost her life leaving a minor child. The husband would have gone through his life with all the travails and difficulties of having to bring up a child. A consideration of case of this type after such a length of time is truly unfortunate. An award that may be passed now after such a length of time may bring no succor, but to a judicial system, it is just another case, heard and disposed. Such type of situations FAO No.262 of 1992 -2- ought not to be repeated. Without the active assistance of the Bar, the judiciary could hardly deliver. It ought to be the responsibility of the counsel who appears to bring to focus immediately such types of cases for quick disposal. There is also a complementary mechanism which is available through Lok Adalats which are ably assisting every Court through retired High Court Judges, District Judges and other eminent persons manning them. Even these adjunct Forums are not fully utilized. The ultimate odium that the judiciary bears in the perspective of the public would seem most unfortunate. The death of a young person who was a householder does not require a magical formula or acute legal forensics for assessment of compensation. The exercise is only in the realm of approximation and conjectures and such type of litigations cannot be simply allowed to gather dust, without somebody bringing up the matter for quick disposal. I use this occasion to sound to the Bar a fervent plea that they must recognize that this provision for an appeal ought not to be made an illusory remedy. The Bar must identify all those cases which require immediate disposals in cases where the issue is merely assessment of quantum of compensation, where motor accident, involvement of vehicle and negligence are admitted facts. There is simply no justification for keeping those genre of accidents pending, without settlement. ADRs are better options in such types of cases than long reasoned judgements. 3. After giving vent to what is an expression of anguish, without meaning to play a blame game, I examine the case on merits. The accident relates to the year 1990 and I would take the householder's services to be `1500/-. One of the claimants at that time was an infant in arms besides the husband. I would make no deduction and take `1500/- as contribution to FAO No.262 of 1992 -3- the family and adopt a multiplier of 18 and hold the amount of loss at `3,24,000/- and make a further addition of 10,000/- as loss of consortium and loss of love and affection for the husband and child respectively and make a further addition of 2500/- towards funeral expenses and hold `3,36,500/- as the amount payable to the claimants. The Tribunal had already assessed the amount of compensation at `30,000/- for the death of the woman. The amount in excess over what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. 4. An epilogue to close my thought on this subject. It must be noticed that the Insurance Company does not stand to gain anything in this process, by not volunteering a settlement, even if the claimant had not approached for a settlement. ADRs or voluntary settlements are not mere empty formulations. They are most ideal to relieve parties of the injustice of keeping a case pending for a long time. Countries that are coping with large volume of work through institutions and disposals manage the same through resourceful and meaningful interventions by the parties themselves, under the supervision of the Court. If every case instituted shall be forced through a compulsory mode of trial and judicial adjudication wrought through elaborate judgements, we will lose a whole life time and more for each Court case to run through all its judicial tiers. The sooner that we realize this, the better. The amount shall be equally distributed amongst the claimants. The liability shall be in the manner as determined by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. January 20, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE