M MANOHARAN Vs. GANDHIMATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company as well as the owner of the vehicle. The only challenge before us is, as regards the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunals. No argument has been advanced as regards the finding on the question of negligence.

(2.) THE deceased was aged 37 years. He was employed in the Railways as a Kalasi. He was getting Rs. 1548/- p.m. as total emoluments. THE Tribunal applied a multiplier of 22 and calculated the total loss of income at Rs. 4,08,672/-. In view of the fact that the compensation has been paid in lump sum, the Tribunal deducted one third therefrom and fixed the compensation at Rs. 2,72,448/-. In addition thereto, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of love and affection for minor respondents 2 and 3, and thus, in all a sum of Rs. 2,97,448/-.

(3.) THERE is no error in adopting the multiplier at 22, as the deceased at the time of his death, was aged only 37 years. It is only on that basis, the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier as 22. The Tribunal has also referred to the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Hardeo Kaur v. Rajasthan State Transport Corporation (1992 (2) L.W. 732). In that case, the deceased was aged about 35 years.