MOHINDER JASPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole question in this Letters Patent appeal argued at the Bar is with respect to the multiplier to be adopted.

(2.) THERE is no dispute on the factual matrix that the deceased was an I. A. S. Officer and member of Punjab Public Service Commission. His age was 57 years at the time of his death.

(3.) MUCH water has flown under the bridges by this time and it has been repeatedly held in a plethora of judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court that while assessing the compensation a suitable multiplier has to be applied to arrive at a just compensation, keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances and even resorting to the rule of thumb to a limited extent wherever required. Pecuniary compensation for loss of life is no substitute for life, yet an endeavour should be to compensate for every loss resulting from the death as far as possible. In our considered view, the age of the widow, the normal expectancy of life at 70 years and need of the company of the husband at the fag end of one's life in the social set up of our country are the factors which cannot be lost sight of, at the lime of fixing the multiplier. Thus, keeping the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case in view, we are of the considered view that multiplier of '8' would be a just multiplier to assess an adequate compensation for the loss of life of such a bright officer, the company of whom the claimant has been deprived of. Further taking into consideration the loss of consortium etc. as observed above, we adopt the multiplier of '8' and the total compensation payable to the claimant thus, comes to Rs. 1,92,000/ -. Further adding the funeral expenses etc. We round off this figure to Rs. 2,00,000/ -.