CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Karamjit Kaur and Others vs Bashamber Dass and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 22 May 2014 · Citation: (2014) 05 P&H CK 0228

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Kannan, J
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
FAO No. 3472 of 2002 (O&M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 351 words

K. Kannan, J.—The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for death of a male, aged 52 years, in an accident that took place on 11.03.1999. The deceased was working as an Accountant in Market Committee, Chanarthal, District Fatehgarh Sahib. The proof of income brought on record showed that he was drawing a salary of Rs. 11,403/- per month. The Tribunal took the income at Rs. 8,000/- per month after compulsory deductions and applying a multiplier of 5, assessed the compensation at Rs. 2,40,000/- as payable to the claimants-widow and son.

2.

I find the assessment to be grossly deficient and rework the compensation taking the income as stated and providing for 1/3rd deductions for personal expenses and applying a multiplier of 11 and tabulate the other heads of claims as per the recent decisions of the Supreme Court as follows:-

There shall be an award of Rs. 11,18,464/- and the additional amount of compensation secured through this award shall attract interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment.

3.

The major son has died during the pendency of appeal and the legal representatives of the son have also been added. The widow will take 50% and the legal representatives of the son the remaining award.

4.

I find that pursuant to the directions given by this Court, the claimants had made a proposal for settlement with the Insurance Company on 25.03.2014 suggesting a sum which is even lower than the amount which has been assessed by me. The claimants have been more than fair in affording an opportunity to the Insurance Company to close in on the offer and move for an appropriate settlement. It is indeed strange that the Insurance Company must have repulsed even a genuine and proper offer made by the claimants. I find the conduct of the Insurance Company to be wholly uncooperative and improper. While allowing the appeal, I impose a cost of Rs. 25,000/- against the respondent No. 3-New India Assurance Company Limited.

5.

The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.