Smt. Pistan and Another Vs. Raj Kumar and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1127198
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnFeb-11-2014
AppellantSmt. Pistan and Another
RespondentRaj Kumar and Others
Excerpt:
archana arora fao no.1695 of 1994 1 2014.02.18 16:56 i am the author of this document in the high court of punjab & haryana, chandigarh fao no.1695 of 1994 date of decision february 13, 2014 smt. pistan and another ......appellants versus raj kumar and others .......respondent coram: hon'ble mr.justice k. kannan present:- mr.g.s. gill, advocate for the appellants. mr.rajiv prasad, dag., haryana. **** 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 of compensation for death of a male aged 22 years.he was said to be making his living by selling milk. the court took the income at `900/- per month applied a multiplier of 12 but it used to differential amounts as contribution to the family on an assumption that he would have got married and contribution to the family would have reduced. a standard application of multiplier and manner of deduction as suggested in sarla verma vs.delhi road transport corporation reported in (2009) 6 sc121 i will take the average income to be `3,000/- apply a deduction of 50% and take the multiplier suitable to age of the deceased at 18 and also provide for conventional heads of fao no.1695 of 1994 2 claims as tabulated below:- fatal accidents date of accident 07/07/93 age 22 occupation selling milk claimants: mother, brother s.no.heads of claim tribunal high court (amount rs.) amount (rs.) 1 income add, % of increase 900/- 3000/- 2 30%/50% 3 deduction 4 multiplicand 1500x12 5 multiplier 18 6 loss of dependence 3,24,000/- 7 medical expenses loss of 2500/- consortium+ loss of love and affection 8 for children 9 loss to estate 5000/- 10 funeral expenses 5000/- 11 total 57,600/- 3,31,500/- the total compensation payable shall be `3,31,500/-. the amount in excess of what has already been granted by the tribunal shall attract interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. although a brother cannot be said to be a dependent, there was evidence that he was dependent on his deceased brother. the apportionment indeed is a matter between the claimants and if the mother had no objection to treat his own son who is handicap as a dependent on his brother then there ought not to be an objection from the respondent that no compensation could be given to the brother in the manner of apportionment of the entitlement. i direct the sum to be divided in the ratio of 2:1 between fao no.1695 of 1994 3 the mother and the son. the award is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent. (k. kannan) judge february 13, 2014 archana
Judgment:

Archana arora FAO No.1695 of 1994 1 2014.02.18 16:56 I am the author of this document IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No.1695 of 1994 Date of decision February 13, 2014 Smt.

Pistan and another ......Appellants Versus Raj Kumar and others .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE K.

KANNAN Present:- Mr.G.S.

Gill, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr.Rajiv Prasad, DAG., Haryana.

**** 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 of compensation for death of a male aged 22 yeaRs.He was said to be making his living by selling milk.

The court took the income at `900/- per month applied a multiplier of 12 but it used to differential amounts as contribution to the family on an assumption that he would have got married and contribution to the family would have reduced.

A standard application of multiplier and manner of deduction as suggested in Sarla Verma Vs.Delhi Road Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SC121 I will take the average income to be `3,000/- apply a deduction of 50% and take the multiplier suitable to age of the deceased at 18 and also provide for conventional heads of FAO No.1695 of 1994 2 claims as tabulated below:- Fatal accidents Date of accident 07/07/93 Age 22 Occupation Selling milk Claimants: Mother, brother S.No.Heads of claim Tribunal High Court (Amount Rs.) Amount (Rs.) 1 Income Add, % of increase 900/- 3000/- 2 30%/50% 3 Deduction 4 Multiplicand 1500x12 5 Multiplier 18 6 Loss of dependence 3,24,000/- 7 Medical expenses Loss of 2500/- consortium+ loss of love and affection 8 for children 9 Loss to estate 5000/- 10 Funeral expenses 5000/- 11 Total 57,600/- 3,31,500/- The total compensation payable shall be `3,31,500/-.

The amount in excess of what has already been granted by the Tribunal shall attract interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.

Although a brother cannot be said to be a dependent, there was evidence that he was dependent on his deceased brother.

The apportionment indeed is a matter between the claimants and if the mother had no objection to treat his own son who is handicap as a dependent on his brother then there ought not to be an objection from the respondent that no compensation could be given to the brother in the manner of apportionment of the entitlement.

I direct the sum to be divided in the ratio of 2:1 between FAO No.1695 of 1994 3 the mother and the son.

The award is modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.

(K.

KANNAN) JUDGE February 13, 2014 archana