FAO No.1775 of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1775 of 2004 Date of Decision.18.11.2010 Smt. Uma Devi wd/o Amar Bahadur and others ......Appellants Versus Nafe Singh son of Sh. Banwari Lal and others ......Respondents Present: Mr. Surender Dhull, Advocate for for the appellants. Mr. Rattan Sidhu, Sr. DAG, Haryana. 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 for the death of a factory worker aged 46 years. The claimants were the wife, son and two daughters. The children were minors. The Personnel Officer of the factory had been examined as PW2 and he had spoken from his records and granted a certificate showing that the deceased was being paid Rs.8607/-. The Tribunal observed that his basic salary was only Rs.1,709/- and all other amounts had been added by way of allowances and therefore, only an income of Rs.4200/- could be taken. I cannot accept such a reasoning, for the allowances that had been included were the contribution to PF, medical, conveyance, production incentives. They are all part of the salary package and there is no law which can take the income only to the basic salary FAO No.1775 of 2004 -2- and an arbitrary increase on such basic salary the way it was done by the Tribunal. I will take the entire income as spoken to by witness PW2 as the income which he earned and I will make a deduction of 1/4th instead of 1/3rd as taken by the Tribunal. In the matter of assessment of compensation, I will adopt the formula given by the decision in Sarla Verma Vs. DTC 2009(6) SCC 121 and the tabulation of income for such assessment is as under:- FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 46 years Occupation Worker of Factory Claimants Wife, son and two daughters Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sl. No. Amount (Rs) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income 8607 8607 2 Add, % of increase 30% / 50% 3 Average monthly income x 12 4200 8600 4 Deduction (1/2 , 1/3, 1/4, 1/5) 1/3rd 1/4th 5 Multiplicand 2800 6450 6 Multiplier 13 13 7 Loss of dependence 4,36,800 10,06,200 8 Medical Expenses & Transportation -- -- 9 Loss of Consortium 5000 5000 10 Loss to estate 11 Funeral expenses -- 8200 5000 8200 Total 4,50,000 10,24,400 3. The amount of compensation what was determined by the Tribunal shall stand increased and difference in amount shall attract interest @6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. Since I am adopting a multiplier of 13 and the case had been filed in the year 2002, I will direct 60% of the amount to be permitted to be withdrawn to all the major claimants and as far as the minor FAO No.1775 of 2004 -3- claimants are concerned, the amount shall stay in deposit in a Nationalized Bank and the interest accruals shall be paid to the mother guardian for the expenses of the children. The remaining 40% of the amount as well as the whole amount of all the minor children beyond their age of mojority shall be split into five equal shares and the deposit shall be taken for the first share for one year, for the second share for two years and so on upto five years. The respective amounts shall be paid on the maturity to the respective claimants. 4. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE November 18, 2010 Pankaj*