ORDER
M.S. Liberhan and T.H.B. Chalapathi, JJ.
1. This judgment will dispose of Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 894 of 1985 filed by various claimants against the common order of the Hon’ble Single Judge partly accepting the four appeals filed by them. The only grievance made by learned counsel for the appellants is that the Hon’ble Single Judge after observing and relying on the income-tax return produced held that the income of the deceased was more that Rs. 20,000/- per annum with a rising trend and came to the conclusion that the dependency was of Rs. 10,000/-. While coming to the said finding, the Hon’ble Single Judge has got taken into consideration the benefits of free telephone, car and other facilities available to the family of the deceased.
2. In our considered view, after going through the record and the evidence and keeping the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case in view, it can be safely inferred that the income of the deceased was more that Rs. 25,000/- per annum and after the usual deduction for personal expenses, the dependency comes to about 15,000/- per annum. The deceased being of 30 years of age and the bread earner of the family, and multiplier of 16 would be the reasonable multiplier for assessing the just compensation. Thus, the compensation comes to Rs. 2,40,000/-. Adding Rs. 10,000/- as the compensation for loss of consortium, we assess compensation at Rs. two lacs fifty thousand as the just compensation for the death of the deceased.
3. In view of the observations made above, we grant Rs. two lacs fifty thousands compensation with twelve per cent per annum interest from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment.
4. So far as the claim of Smt. Kalpana Sharma for the injuries is concerned, in our considered view, as she remained admitted in the P.G.I. for 1-1/2 months and is still required to undergo another operation, the compensation awarded viz., Rs. 30,000/- for pain, suffered by her, Rs. 1000/- for loss of income for 1 1/2 months as she was working as a teacher and Rs. 2000/- on account of the expenses incurred by her on account of being unable to attend to her house during her treatment is too low. An amount of Rs. 60,000/- in total, under the heads of compensation for injuries, permanent scars, loss of income for 1 1/2 months, other expenditure incurred by her during her treatment in the hospital will in our view meet the ends of justice. Thus, we modify the award of compensation to Smt. Kalpana and increase the compensation from Rs. 33,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- with twelve per cent interest from the date of application till the date of payment.
5. The last claim made by learned counsel for the appellants is with regard to the child of eight years who underwent neuro surgery, particularly when the head bone has been removed. In our considered view, Rs. 20,000/- is too petty an amount for such an injury suffered by such a young child as he has to suffer throughout his life on account of likelihood of retardation because of the injury. We enhance the compensation to Rs. 40,000/-. The claimant will be entitled to twelve per cent interest from the date of the claim petition till payment. So far as the claim with respect to compensation for damage to the car is concerned, it has not been pressed.
6. In view of the observations made above award of the Hon’ble Single Judge is modified in the above terms and the appeals are allowed to that extent. However, there will be no order as to costs.