IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.906 of 2009 Date of decision:16.08.2010 The New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Devinder Kumar and others ...Respondents II. FAO No.907 of 2009 The New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Devinder Kumar and others ...Respondents III. FAO No.2628 of 2009 The New India Assurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Rattan Chand Joshi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. V.Ramswaroop, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- FAO No.906 of 2009 - 2 - K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The Insurance Company which had the benefit of defence under Section 170 is on appeal on the issue of negligence and quantum. 2. The three claims are for death for a child, a lady, who was the wife and for injuries by the claimant for himself and as representative of the deceased child and the wife. 3. While assessing the issue of negligence, the Tribunal had before it the evidence of the claimant, who was also the driver of the car. He had stated that the accident took place on account of the insurer's truck coming in reverse gear from a side road and dashing against the car. While the manner of how the vehicle had come on to the main road by the negligent driving of the truck was spoken to by the claimant, the driver of the truck himself was not examined to explain his version. The police investigation had also revealed that the driver of the truck was responsible and it appears that a case had also been registered against him. In the absence of any contra evidence to the version of the claimant relating to the accident, the Tribunal found that the driver of the insurer's truck was negligent and caused the accident. I find the reasoning of the Tribunal adequate to sustain its finding and I make no intervention in that regard. 4. As regards the quantum relating to a claim arising out of death of the minor, the Tribunal took note of the fact that the child which died was the only for the claimant and it was a poignant situation of a claimant suffering the loss of not merely as wife but also the child. A child's contribution to the family or to the claimant must be seen in the context of contribution of happiness for a father. There could be no FAO No.906 of 2009 - 3 - monetary equivalent for the loss and if the Tribunal had assessed the loss to Rs.2,25,000/-, I do not wish to alter the same. 5. As regards the death of the wife of the claimant it had come out on record that she was an income tax assessee and the Tribunal has given due regard to the income as found in the IT returns and adopted a multiplier of 16 for a person aged 36 years. I do not find any error in the approach of the Tribunal as regards the quantum also. 6. As regards the appeal which is the subject matter against the award for injuries, the Tribunal assessed the injuries to Rs.66,446/-. In my view, it is modest and I do not think there is any necessity to make any modification with reference to the same. 7. The respective awards of the Tribunal which are the subject of appeal are maintained and the appeals are dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 16.08.2010 sanjeev