FAO No.2143 of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2143 of 2004 Date of Decision.18.11.2010 Laxmi widow of Sultan and others ......Appellants Versus Pritam Kumar son of Chandi Ram and others ......Respondents 2. FAO No.2144 of 2004 Lado widow of Ram Kumar son of Fateh Singh, aged 43 years and another ......Appellant Versus Pritam Kumar son of Chandi Ram and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Nihal Singh Dhindsa, Advocate for for the appellant. Mr. Mrigank Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the insurance company. 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. Both these appeals arise for enhancement of the claim for compensation. As regards the claim for compensation for the claimants, which is subject matter of appeal in FAO N.2143 of 2004, the deceased was 40 years of age and he was a contractor. The claimants were the widow, two minor sons and two minor daughters. The was a contractor and he had secured the evidence of a Secretary of Building Society, who had entrusted some contract work to him. FAO No.2143 of 2004 -2- The evidence was that he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month but no income tax return had been filed. To that extent, the Tribunal took the income to be Rs.48,000/- per annum, made a deduction of 1/4th and adopted a multiplier of 14. The modification that is called for in this case is to provide for a multiplier of 15 as suggested by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma Vs. DTC 2009(6) SCC 121. The Tribunal had fixed Rs.25,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses and loss to estate. I would take the same amount as payable and with the modification which is carried out in terms of the Sarla Verma's case (supra), the following tabulation would apply:- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 40 years Occupation Contractor Claimants Widow, four minor children Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 4000 5000 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 48000 60000 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/4th 1/4th 5 Multiplicand 36000 45000 6 Multiplier 14 15 7 Loss of dependence 504000 6,75,000 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation 9 Loss of Consortium 25000 25000 10 11 Loss to estate Funeral expenses 5000 5000 Total 5,34,000 7,05,000 2. Having regard to the fact that I have applied a multiplier of FAO No.2143 of 2004 -3- 15 and the accident had taken place in the year 2003, I would direct 50% of the amount permitted to be withdrawn so far as the widow is concerned and the remaining 50% will be deposited for a period of five years for payment to the respective minor claimants in five equal shares. The first share shall be deposited for a period of one year, the second share for a period of two yeas and so on till the period of five years. No payment, however, shall be released to any of the minor claimants during their minority. The interest accruals of the sum deposited shall be only paid to the mother for maintenance of the children. 3. FAO No.2143 of 2004 addresses the claim for widow and minor son to the deceased, who was 50 years of age and who was said to be an agriculturist having 28 acres of land. The Tribunal took the loss of income as Rs.5,000/-, provided for a deduction of 1/3rd and adopted a multiplier of 11. It added Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and for love and affection for child and determined a compensation of Rs.4,50,000/-. In cases of agriculturists, it must be remembered that the asset remains intact and we can only provide for the loss of managerial skills of the deceased. The Tribunal had taken the loss to be Rs.5,000/- and assessed the compensation. I will retain the same and the only modification that I would feel necessary to do is to take a multiplier of 13 instead of 11. I adopt the formula given by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma Vs. DTC 2009(6) SCC 121 and I would tabulate the amount which is payable to the claimant as follows:- FAO No.2143 of 2004 -4- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 50 years Occupation Agriculturist Claimants Widow, minor son Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 60000 60000 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3rd 1/3rd 5 Multiplicand 40000 40000 6 Multiplier 11 13 7 Loss of dependence 4,40,000 5,20,000 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation -- -- 9 Loss of Consortium 10000 10000 10 Loss to estate 11 Funeral expenses -- 5000 2500 Total 4,50,000 5,37,500 4. 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. The accident had taken place in the year 2003 and I will direct 50% of the amount to be deposited and remaining 50% so far as the 1st claimant is concerned shall be permitted to be withdrawn. As regards the minor's share, it will be retained in deposit till he attains the age of majority and the interest accruals alone shall be paid to he mother for maintenance of the child. The minor's share shall be split into six equal shares and the deposit shall be taken for the first share for one year, for second share for two years and so on for six years. 5. The awards are passed against all the respondents and insurance company shall be liable to indemnify the claim that is FAO No.2143 of 2004 -5- awarded against the owner namely Haryana Roadways. The appeals are allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE November 18, 2010 Pankaj*