- (1.) LEAVE granted. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. The Tribunal after considering the materials on record has chosen to determine the annual dependency at Rs. 19,800.00 and applying the multiplier of 16 worked out the compensation payable as Rs. 3,16,800.00. Adding to the said amount a further sum of Rs. 30,000.00 towards conventional damages the total compensation was determined at Rs. 3,46,800.00. Adjusting the sum of Rs. 15,000.00, said to have already been paid by the employer as ex gratia payment the net amount payable was arrived at by the Tribunal as Rs. 3,31,800.00 with interest @ 12% from the date of filing the petition i.e. 8/3/1984 till the date of realization.
(2.) ON the other hand, the High Court1 seems to have not only applied a reduced multiplier of 12 but has chosen to reduce from the amount determined a further sum of Rs. 30,600.00 said to have been spent by the Company towards the group insurance scheme policy. Ultimately, the High Court arrived at the final figure of Rs. 1,58,400.00 and after giving credit for the sum already said to have been withdrawn in a sum of Rs. 1,33,000.00 directed the payment of Rs. 25,400.00, with proportionate interest, in the manner indicated therein. The learned counsel for the appellant, apart from contending that the reduction of the multiplier and the further deduction made was not warranted also urged that the cross-objections filed were not duly and properly considered.
(3.) PER contra, learned counsel for the respondent strenuously contended placing reliance upon a decision of this Court in Uttar Pradesh SRTC Vs. Trilok Chandra that the reduced multiplier was a proper and just one on the facts of this case and no exception could be taken to the same. Further, objection was also taken to the award of interest @ 12% instead of 9%, besides contending that the deduction of the amount spent for obtaining policy under the group insurance was rightly made by the High Court and that the same does not warrant interference.;