Present: Mr.Vikram Bali Advocate for Vs. Kewal Singh Son of Sh. Gobinder Singh Resident of Village Badowal - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1064362
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMay-09-2013
AppellantPresent: Mr.Vikram Bali Advocate for
RespondentKewal Singh Son of Sh. Gobinder Singh Resident of Village Badowal
Excerpt:
fao no.5890 o”1. in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh fao no.5890 of 2010 date of decision:09. 05.2013 smt. kismis devi wife of late sh. man singh, resident of village mauli jagran, house no.543/3, post office manimajra, ut. chandigarh and others .....appellants versus kewal singh son of sh. gobinder singh, resident of village badowal, police station bhikhi, district mansa (punjab) and others .....respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice k. kannan 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 present: mr.vikram bali, advocate for mr.h.s.chawla, advocate for the appellants. ms.vandana malhotra, advocate and mr.monika jangra, advocate for respondent no.3. ******* k. kannan, j.(oral) 1. the appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation for death of a male aged 50 years.the claimants were widow and three children. the tribunal took the income at `3000/-, applied a 50% deduction for personal expenses and adopted a multiplier of 2011. the leaned counsel seeks for consideration of compensation in the light of fao no.5890 o”2. the decision in sarla verma versus dtc (2009) 5 scc 12.and recent judgment of the supreme court in rajesh and others versus rajbir singh in civil appeal no.3860 of 2013.”2. on an income of `3000/- i will provide for a 1/3rd deduction and take the monthly contribution on `2250/-, adopted a multiplier of 13 instead of 11 as taken by the court. the loss of dependence at `3,51,000/-, i will add `1 lakh for loss of consortium and `1 lakh for loss of care and guidance of the father and providing an additional amount of `2 lakhs in the manner laid down by the supreme court in the decision rendered on 12.04.2013. the claimant shall also have the benefit of the conventional heads of claim of another `30000/- shall be added that will include `25,000/- as funeral expenses. the liability shall be the same as determined by the tribunal. the total amount of `5,81,000/- shall be apportioned in the same manner as provided by the tribunal. since the accident has taken place in 2005 and 8 years have already elapsed i will make no provision for retention of the amount in deposit. the whole amount shall be permitted to be withdrawn. 09.05.2013 [ k. kannan ].diwaker gulati judge
Judgment:

FAO No.5890 o”

1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.5890 of 2010 Date of decision:

09. 05.2013 Smt.

Kismis Devi wife of late Sh.

Man Singh, resident of village Mauli Jagran, House No.543/3, Post Office Manimajra, UT.

Chandigarh and others .....Appellants VERSUS Kewal Singh son of Sh.

Gobinder Singh, resident of village Badowal, Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa (Punjab) and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE K.

KANNAN 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 Present: Mr.Vikram Bali, Advocate for Mr.H.S.Chawla, Advocate for the appellants.

Ms.Vandana Malhotra, Advocate and Mr.Monika Jangra, Advocate for respondent No.3.

******* K.

KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1.

The appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation for death of a male aged 50 yeaRs.The claimants were widow and three children.

The Tribunal took the income at `3000/-, applied a 50% deduction for personal expenses and adopted a multiplier of 2011.

The leaned counsel seeks for consideration of compensation in the light of FAO No.5890 o”

2. the decision in Sarla Verma versus DTC (2009) 5 SCC 12.and recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajesh and others versus Rajbir Singh in Civil Appeal No.3860 of 2013.”

2. On an income of `3000/- I will provide for a 1/3rd deduction and take the monthly contribution on `2250/-, adopted a multiplier of 13 instead of 11 as taken by the Court.

The loss of dependence at `3,51,000/-, I will add `1 lakh for loss of consortium and `1 lakh for loss of care and guidance of the father and providing an additional amount of `2 lakhs in the manner laid down by the Supreme Court in the decision rendered on 12.04.2013.

The claimant shall also have the benefit of the conventional heads of claim of another `30000/- shall be added that will include `25,000/- as funeral expenses.

The liability shall be the same as determined by the Tribunal.

The total amount of `5,81,000/- shall be apportioned in the same manner as provided by the Tribunal.

Since the accident has taken place in 2005 and 8 years have already elapsed I will make no provision for retention of the amount in deposit.

The whole amount shall be permitted to be withdrawn.

09.05.2013 [ K.

KANNAN ].Diwaker Gulati JUDGE