FAO No.602 of 1998 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.602 of 1998 (O&M) Date of Decision. 11.02.2011 Smt. Pavitra Kumari aged 25 years and others ......Appellants Versus Ram Kishore caste Harijan son of Tara Chand and others .....Respondents Present: None for the appellant. None for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Vinod Chaudhari, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 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 compensation for death of a young lawyer aged 29 years. The claimants were widow, two minor children and old parents. The income tax return which had not been exhibited showed that he had income of Rs.48100/- annually before his death. The Tribunal, however, rejected this reckoning on account of the fact that there was nothing to show that the income tax return had been exhibited and the Tribunal also found that the best evidence of his statement of income and expenditure had not been filed and therefore, took the income to be Rs.2400/-. For a person, who was a lawyer and when it was not in dispute that he an income tax assessee, the Tribunal FAO No.602 of 1998 (O&M) -2- could not have rejected the evidentiary value by the only fact that the return had not been exhibited. If the return had been filed prior to his death then it would not be material that it was not exhibited. We are not deciding an issue of assessment of tax which is recoverable from the party but we are only using this document for considering whether the claim by the deceased of a return, which he filed during his life time was a proper basis for taking the income. I would take the income found in the document as established. The Tribunal had taken Rs.300/- as the value of the services for managing agricultural lands which was to the extent of 12 kanals. I am of the view that it was grossly low and I will make the loss of services for a land, which was fairly large should be taken at least Rs.1,000/- per month. Therefore, I will make a further addition of Rs.12,000/- to take his annual income at Rs.60,100/- and make a deduction of 10% towards tax. I will make a deduction of 1/4th and take the contribution to the family at Rs.7,29,405/-. I tabulate the claim of compensation as below:- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 29 years Occupation Lawyer+agriculturist Claimants Widow, 2 minor sons, parents Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 2400 54090 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3rd 1/4th 5 Multiplicand 1800x12 40567 6 Multiplier 16 18 7 Loss of dependence 3,45,600 730206 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation -- FAO No.602 of 1998 (O&M) -3- FATAL ACCIDENTS 9 Loss of Consortium and love and affection 10000 10 Loss to estate 11 Funeral expenses 5000 2500 Total 4,50,000 7,47,706 2. The amount in excess over what has been awarded by the Tribunal shall bear interest @6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. 3. The increase in award of compensation shall be shared only between the wife and the two children. The liability shall be in the manner as determined by the Tribunal. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. There is no representation for the appellant at the time when the matter is called. Registry is directed to send the copy of the order directly to the parties. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 11, 2011 Pankaj*