Raj Kumari vs State of Haryana

M.S. Liberhan, J.

This judgment will dispose of Letters Patent Appeal No. 985 and 1151 of 1985 as common questions of law and fact are involved therein.

Firstly the grievance made in these appeals is that while awarding the compensation, multiplier of `16'' has been applied and in fact it should have been fixed at `20''. The second grievance made is that dependency of the claimants was fixed at Rs. 500/ per month while in fact, it should have been fixed at Rs. 1,500/ per month.

The undisputed facts which are taken from the judgment of Hon''ble Single Judge are that the deceased was a sportsman having done his M..A. but was an unemployed youth of 27 years. He had applied for various posts where he was unable to succeed i.e. like Assistant SubInspector of Police. He also held a diploma in Physical Education in first Division and also applied for the post of A.D.P. (Male). The learned Single Judge, keeping in view the high aspiration in life of the deceased, assessed the dependency of the claimants at Rs. 500/ per month. We find no error in the same and there is no ground to interfere with the same as it cannot be termed in any manner perverse order or not reasonably sustainable.

Keeping in view the dependency of the claimants at Rs. 500/ per month i.e. Rs. 6,000/ per annum and age of the deceased being 27 years, the amount of compensation assessed at Rs. 1,00,000/ by the authorities below would be a just compensation awarded to the claimants.

In view of the observations made above, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.

Learned counsel for the State has not been able to point out any error worth noticing for disturbing the finding arrived at by the learned Single Judge with respect to the dependency or application of adequate multiplier. In view of this we find no merit in the crossappeal filed on behalf of the State of Haryana. The same is accordingly also dismissed with no order as to costs.