RAVEENA & OTHERS Vs. JAMUNA PARSAD & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The widow and the minor daughter of the deceased arraying the mother of the deceased as one of the respondents preferred the present appeal challenging the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal.

(2.) Deceased Mahipal Yadav was in military service at the time when he met with an accident and died. The Tribunal has fixed his age between 27-30 years. The Tribunal having referred to the decision of this Court in Inder Singh and another vs. Ram Niwas and others, 2003 4 RCR(Civ) 347 and Bhakra Beas Management Board vs. Kanta Aggarwal and Ors., 2008 3 RCR(Civ) 733deducted 30% of the loss of dependency towards the prospective family pension which would be received by the family members having applied the multiplier of '16'.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the Tribunal has lost sight of the march of the law pronounced by the Hon ble Apex Court while electing to deduct the family pension from the loss of dependency arrived by it. It is also his submission that by virtue of the decision in Sarla Verma vs. DTC, 2009 6 SCC 121, the Tribunal having assessed the age of the deceased as 30 years should have applied the multiplier of '17' to arrive at the loss of dependency.