F.A.O.NO.4305 OF 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO.4305 OF 2009 Date of decision:4th August, 2010 United India Insurance Company Limited .......Appellant Versus Ranjit Singh and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Ms. Sonal Datta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Sham Lal Bhalla, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Navdeep Chhabra, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the quantum on the ground that the Tribunal has treated the case as a case of death when it was a case of injury and it has adopted a multiplier theory for arriving at compensation. There is nothing wrong about adoption of a theory of multiplier for an injury so long as the assessment is F.A.O.NO.4305 OF 2009 2 made on the basis which is permissible by law. Indeed the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in PSRTC v. M.Pentaiah Chary (2004) 13 SCC 625 that in all injury cases the appropriate method shall only be to invoke the multiplier theory. 2. An issue relating to compensation cannot be an issue which the insurer could challenge without express permission granted under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The appeal is not maintainable and the appeal is dismissed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 4th August, 2010 Shivani Kaushik