IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.887 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:04.05.2011 Sudesh Kumari and another ...Appellants versus Gurjeet Singh and others. ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate, for Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate, for the appellants. ---- 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. Delay of 2 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for death of a boy, aged 18 years. The Tribunal took the income to be Rs.15,000/- per annum, made a deduction of 1/3rd and adopted a multiplier of 16 in the manner of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.K.Malik and another Versus Kiran Pal and others-2009(3) PLR 35. It made additions of amounts toward conventional heads and awarded compensation of Rs.2,65,000/-. The learned counsel states that appropriate multiplier must have been 18 and not 16. I do not find any merit on such a contention, for, in the manner of ascertainment of FAO No.887 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - compensation, the Tribunal has adopted what was stated in Schedule-II to apply a multiplier of 16 for a person aged between 15 to 20 years. I do not find any error in the assessment. 3. The learned counsel further states that interest has not been awarded. The Tribunal had provided that the award will draw interest at 7.5% if the amount was not paid within a stipulated period. The case was instituted on 10.12.2007 and it was disposed of on 12.06.2010 i.e. after about 2 ½ years. No serious prejudice could be said to have been cased by making a conditional order in the manner it was done by the Tribunal. 4. The award is confirmed and the appeal is allowed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 04.05.2011 sanjeev