Judgment:
FAO No.308 o”
1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No.308 of 2013 Date of decision February 6, 2013 New India Assurance Co. Ltd ....... Appellants Versus Kuldeep Singh and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Ashwani Talwar , Advocate for the appellant. **** 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 by the insurer against an award of compensation providing for `3,02,600/- with interest at 7.5% for a death of a male aged 54 years. The sons and daughters were all major and in the manner of assessment the compensation determined as though they were dependents, according to the counsel for the insurer was not tenable in law. Learned counsel refers me to the decision rendered in Smt. Manjuri Bera Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. 2007 (2) RCR (Civil) 675, Gaurishankar Dable and others Vs. Jagtarsingh and others 2007 ACJ 217.and P. Jonson Vs. Prelaswamy 2011 AAC 41.to contend that there could not have been any loss of dependency in FAO No.308 o”
2. the manner done by the Court below.
2. When the assessment is made on the basis of dependency, loss to estate which is one of the heads of claim becomes merely a conventional head of claim to be satisfied. On the other hand, when the sons or daughters who are majors themselves and who may not be dependents, the loss to estate could become considerable for the sons and daughters who are legal heirs to the father. If the deceased male would have earned and left an estate that could have been inherited by the children that should be quantified as amount payable. In this case since the deceased was 54 years and he would have earned for the rest of his productive life and made possible an accrual to an estate that could have fallen to the hands of the legal heirs, a complete rejection of claim is simply not possible. In this case, if the Court has assessed the income of the deceased at `6,200/-, I would assume such a person would have left behind an accrual not less than the amount which is already determined. Even if the claim cannot be sustained the loss of dependency, it could be justified as going towards loss to estate.
3. The award is sustained and the appeal is dismissed although for different reasons than what was stated in the order of the Tribunal. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 6, 2013 archana