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 2, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Smt. Meena Devi And Another vs Sh. Gurnam Singh And Another on 14 January, 2014

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

                                                              Archana arora
FAO No. 4366 of 2012(O&M)                            1        2014.01.21 16:31
                                                              I am the author of this
                                                              document

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

                                 FAO No. 4366 of 2012(O&M)
                            Date of decision January 14, 2014

Smt. Meena Devi and another

                                               ....... Appellants
                            Versus

Sh. Gurnam Singh and another
                                               ........ Respondents

CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

Present:-       Mr. Ashwani Arora , Advocate
                for the appellants.

                None for the respondents.

                      ****

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).

CM Nos. 23460-61-CII of 2012 For the reasons stated in the applications, applications are allowed. Delay in filing and refiling the appeal is condoned.

FAO No. 4366 of 2012

1. The issue for consideration is claim for compensation for death of a son of the claimants aged 24 years. He was running a shop and assessed to income tax before his death he had returned income after payment of tax at `1,20,764/-. The court had allowed for 50% deduction and applied a multiplier of 13 commensurate with the age of the claimants. The counsel arguing FAO No. 4366 of 2012(O&M) 2 for the appellant seeks for redetermination of compensation to make provision for a prospect of future increase in the manner contemplated in Reshma Kumari and others Vs. Madan Mohan 2013 8 SCC 54 and for choice of multiplier to conform to the age of the deceased in the manner dealt with by the Supreme Court in Amrit Bhansali Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. 2012 ACJ 2002. I will accede to the contention and take the increase to be `1,75,000/- adopt a multiplier of 18 and provide also for funeral expenses at `25,000/- and other conventional heads and tabulate the same as under:

Heads of claim Tribunal High Court S.No. ` ` ` 1 Income 1,20,764 1,26,764/-
                  Add, % of increase                         1,75,000/-
                2 50%
                3 Deduction
                4 Multiplier                            13                    18
                5 Loss of dependence                         15,75,000/-
                  Loss             of                        10,000/-
                  consortium/love and
                6 affection
                7 Loss to estate                             10,000/-
                8 Funeral expenses                           25,000/-
                  Total                 7,85,000/-           16,20,000/-




2. The additional amount will attract interest at 7.5% per annum and the liability shall be the same as determined already.

The appeal is allowed to the above extent.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE January 14, 2014 archana