IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1433 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision:11.11.2010 Kumud Sood and others ....Appellants versus M/s Mast Ram Gian Chand Sabji Mandi Shimla through its partner/proprietors and others. ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.Krishan Singh Dadwal, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr.Pardeep Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr.Inderjit Sharma, Advocate, and Mr. Pradeep Bedi, Advocate, for respondent No.6. ---- 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 ? ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The appeal is for enhancement of the award arising out of a claim for death in a motor accident. The deceased was a person, who was having a business along with the other members of his family for which he was getting Rs.1,500/- per month and he was running three taxis and earning Rs.6,000/- per month. The evidence was that the two children, who were of 11 and 9 years, were put in schools and the husband was giving to the wife Rs.5,000/- for running the family and giving Rs.500/- to his parents for support and spending about Rs.1,800/- for daughter and Rs.1,500/- for son for their respective tuition expenses. FAO No.1433 of 1992 (O&M) - 2 - The Tribunal took the income to be Rs.3,000/- per month and after making a deduction of 1/3rd applied a multiplier of 10 to provide for a compensation of Rs.2,25,000/-. It deducted Rs.30,000/- out of the said assessment, holding that the son would have become a major after 7 years and that there would be no more dependence after he became a major. 2. As regards the income, the counsel for the Insurance Company points out that he was not an income tax assessee and no accounts were produced for the income from the business for running the taxis. According to him, the capital value of the assets are still intact and, therefore, the income could be assessed only on the basis of loss of supervisory services rendered by the deceased. I would take the income from the partnership family business as stated at Rs.1,500/- and provide for another Rs.2,000/- as loss of supervision for the business, having due regard to the fact of the prevailing earning pattern that could have existed for the year 1989 when the accident took place. Instead of Rs.3,000/-, I would take the monthly income at Rs.3,500/- and make a deduction of 1/4th for personal expenses, having regard to the fact that there were five dependents. So reckoned, the extent of dependency per month would be Rs.2,625/- and the annual dependency, I will take Rs.31,500/-. I will adopt a multiplier of 15 and take the compensation payable at Rs.4,72,500/-. I will add towards loss of consortium to the wife and loss for love and affection for the children @ Rs.5,000/- each and provide also for loss to estate and funeral expenses the amounts to an extent to make the amount of compensation payable as Rs.5 lakhs. FAO No.1433 of 1992 (O&M) - 3 - 3. The vehicle that was involved in the accident was a truck insured with the New India Assurance Company. The liability of the Insurance Company as per the then Act prevailing was Rs.1,50,000/- and the same is maintained. The amount in excess namely of Rs.3,50,000/- shall be borne by the owner of the truck namely respondent No.4 and the amount will attract interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of payment. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 11.11.2010 sanjeev