SAROJ MALHOTRA Vs. AMRIK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for death of a male aged between 45 to 50 years. The accident had taken place on 1.11.1993. The deceased was a Sectional officer in HAFED. The claimants were widow, two minor children and parents.

(2.) His salary was taken as Rs. 60,000/- only. The tribunal applied a deduction of 1/3rd and assessed a compensation of Rs. 5,20,000/-. Counsel for the claimants has two contentions to make; i) as regards the quantum and the apportionment of liability amongst the respondents in the manner done by the tribunal.

(3.) As regards the quantum the contention is that the father of the deceased gave evidence to the effect that he was borne in the year 1950 and there was a statement that he was 42 years of age at the time of accident. The employers who had been made parties had themselves not denied the age. The doctor who had conducted the postmortem had only stated that he had recorded the age on the basis of the statement given by the police to be between 45 to 50 years. The counsel would argue that the Court must have taken the age of 42 years and not as 45 to 50 years. If there was a documentary proof relating to the age the evidence could be produced only by the claimants. Merely relying on their own assertions in the petition and postmortem showed fixed age of 45 to 50 years. The tribunal was justified in taking that age as stated within the range mentioned in the postmortem. The prospect of increase in salary must be taken in that context which will be available for a person who was in a settled employment. I will take the income to be Rs. 60,000/- in the manner taken by the tribunal applying a prospect of increase by 30% and using a multiplier of 13 and I would re-work the various heads of compensation as under:-