KARNAIL SINGH Vs. JASBIR KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is by the owner against the award directing the compensation to be paid to the claimants on account of the death of the husband of the 1st claimant. THEre had been a denial of involvement of the vehicle at the trial but the Tribunal relied on the details as contained in the FIR that had been lodged immediately after the accident stating that Mahindra Tractor was involved in the accident. It was stated that there was a contradiction in the evidence elicited through PW-3 when he stated that the tractor was of some other make. I do not think that this is a very serious contradiction, for a particular manufacture of the tractor was stated in the FIR and it is not denied that the appellant had also owned the vehicle of the particular manufacture described in the FIR. Even as regards the quantum of compensation, I do not find that there is any serious mistake, for the Tribunal had adopted a multiplier of 14 in a case where the deceased was said to be aged 36 years. THE contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that there was not proper proof of the age of the deceased. THE Tribunal had relied on the age as contained in the postmortem certificate and I do not find that there is any mistake in such approach as well. I do not find any reason to interfere with the award.

(2.) THE award at the instance of the appellant is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. It is stated that there is a claim for enhancement at the instance of the claimants. This disposal will not have any bearing to the merits of the case that may be permitted to be urged by the claimants at the time when the appeal comes up for final hearing.