Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Smt. Phula Devi Widow Of Ram Chander Son ... vs Shamsher Son Of Fateh Singh And Others on 18 November, 2010

Author: K.Kannan

Bench: K.Kannan

F.A.O.NO. 2142 OF 2002                         1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                         F.A.O.NO. 2142 OF 2002
                         Date of decision:18th November, 2010


Smt. Phula Devi widow of Ram Chander son of Hajari and another
                                           .......Appellants

                         Versus

Shamsher son of Fateh Singh and others
                                               ........Respondents


BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN

Present:      Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate,
              for the appellant.

              Mr. Kunal Garg, AAG, Haryana.

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 claim for enhancement of compensation is at the instance of the claimants who were widow, two minor children and the father who were said to be an agriculturist and also doing business in milk diary. The Tribunal took the income of the deceased as Rs. 2,200/- per month, provided for an extent of dependence at Rs. 1,500/- per month and adopted a multiplier of 15. It found loss of dependency at Rs. 2,16,200/-. It added Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium and provided for additional amount of Rs. 8,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses.

F.A.O.NO. 2142 OF 2002 2

2. Learned counsel contends that the deceased was supporting a large family and the Tribunal ought to have provided only 1/4th towards personal expenses. It is also contended that income taken was grossly low for supporting a large family of five persons. The earning income of the deceased ought to have been taken in the manner spoken to by the witness namely Phulli Devi that he was earning Rs. 1,00,000/- per annum from the agriculture. I will take income to be Rs. 2,500/- per month, provide for a deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses and retain a multiplier of 15 as taken by the Tribunal. I will retain loss of consortium and loss of funeral expenses as taken by the Tribunal. On the whole the total amount of compensation will be Rs. 3,50,500/-. The tabulated form of these calculations are as under:-

FATAL ACCIDENTS Age 42 years Occupation Agriculturist, Milk Diary Claimants Wife, two minor children and father Heads of claim Tribunal High Court Sr. No. Amount(Rs) Amount(Rs) 1 Income 2200 2500 Add, % Increase 2 30% / 50% Deduction ½, 1/3, ¼, 1/4th 1//5 3 Multiplicand 1500 x 12= 1875 x 12 = 22,500 4 18000 5 Multiplier 15 15 6 Loss of dependence 2,70,000 3,37,500 7 Medical expenses --- -----
F.A.O.NO. 2142 OF 2002 3

FATAL ACCIDENTS Loss of consortium, Loss of Love and 8 Affection 5000 5000 9 Loss to estate --- ...

       10          Funeral Expenses       8000            8000
                             Total       2,83,000       3,50,500

2. The amount in excess over what has already been awarded by the Tribunal shall attract interest at 6% from the date of the petition till the date of payment.

3. The increased amount shall be divided only amongst the widow and the children. The extent of liability amongst the respondents shall be in the same manner as apportioned by the Tribunal.

[K.KANNAN] JUDGE 18th November, 2010 Shivani Kaushik