FAO No. 1576 of 1992 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 1576 of 1992 Date of decision February 4, 2011 Nirmla Devi and another ....... Appellant Versus Gurnek Singh and others FAO No. 48 of 1993 ........Respondents Smt. Anju Rani ....... Appellant Versus Gurnak Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Deepak Agnihotri , Advocate and Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate for the appellant in FAO No.1576 of 1992 and None for the appellant in FAO No.48 of 1993. Mr. Paul S. Saini , Advocate for respondent No.2 in both the appeals. Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate and Mr.Vijaypal,Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in FAO No.48 of 1993. None for respondent Nos.1,3 and 4 in FAO No.1576 of 1992 and 1 and 3 in FAO No.48 of 1993. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The two appeals are connected are at the instance of the widow and another at the instance of parents. The petition FAO No. 1576 of 1992 2 was originally presented by the parents arraying widow as a respondent but later transposed as a claimant. The appeals survives for consideration for determination of the quantum as well as the apportionment. 2. The deceased was a matriculate and was a holder of diploma in Pharmacy and he was aged 25 years. The evidence was that he was earning `2500/- in a pharmaceutical shop. The Tribunal rejected the contention and took monthly income to be `1500/- adopted a multiplier of 20 to determine a compensation of `2,40,000/-. 3. In the manner of apportionment the Tribunal awarded 75% to the wife and 25% to the parents. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant in FAO No.1576 of 1992 would contend that the income must have been taken as `2500/- and would rely as additional evidence the salary certificate and income tax return of the shop which was supposed to have employed him. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has strong objection for reception of the same and would urge that it is fabricated for the purpose of the case. The employer was his own grandfather and this document had been made and produced subsequent to the death. Even while rejecting the document filed as additional evidence, I will take income to be `2,500/- instead of `1,500/- as taken by the Tribunal. I will provide for a deduction of 1/3rd and take the contribution to the family at `1666/- and adopt a multiplier of 18 and hold the loss of dependency at `3,60,000/-. I will add `5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the wife and make a further additional of `5,000/- towards funeral expenses and loss to estate. The total compensation therefore would be `3,70,000/-. 4. Learned counsel for the parents would say that larger portion of compensation must be given to the parents what was determined by the Tribunal. The widow was very young and she had come by enormous grief at a young age having lost a husband aged 25 years. FAO No. 1576 of 1992 3 An apportionment already made by the Tribunal in my view, would be seen to be just and I will therefore retain the same. The amount in excess of what has been awarded by the Tribunal shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. The amount shall be distributed in the same manner as provided by the Tribunal and the liability shall also be same as determined by the Tribunal. The appeals are allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 4, 2011 archana