In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
...
FAO No. 63 of 1994
Date of decision: December 19,2008
Smt. Reshma Devi wife of Rishi Pal ..Appellant.
Versus
Jagdish son of Het Ram and others ..Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg
Present: Mr.B.S.Walia, Advocates
for the appellant.
...
Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.
This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of compensation. The
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- as compensation on account of
the death of one Rishi Pal in the motor vehicle accident which occurred due to
rash and negligent driving of the jeep owned by the respondents. While
determining the compensation, the annual dependency of the deceased was
assessed at Rs. 36,000/- per annum and a multiplier of 10 was applied and a
total compensation of Rs. 3,60,000/- was awarded.
From the record, I find that at the time of accident, the deceased
was about 25 years of age. The claimants are parents and wife of the deceased.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellants. He has vehemently
argued that multiplier of 10 applied in this case is on the lower side and a higher
multiplier should have been applied.
After determining the annual dependency, a suitable multiplier is to
be applied by taking into consideration the number of years of the dependency of
the various dependents, the number of years by which the life of the deceased
was cut short and the various imponderable factors such as early natural death
of the deceased, his becoming incapable of supporting the dependents due to
illness or any other natural handicap or calamity, the prospects of the remarriage
of the widow, the coming up of age of the dependents and their developing
independent source of income as well as the pecuniary benefits which might
have accrue to the dependents on account of the death of the person
concerned. Compensation cannot be assessed in a strait-jacket formula and
some element of guess work is always there.
Thus, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, I
find that the compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and adequate. No
interference in the same is called for.
Dismissed.
December 19, 2008 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
nk JUDGE