K. Kannan, J. - (1.) THERE is no representation for the Appellant. Counsel for the Respondent -insurance company is present and I proceed to take up the case and dispose it of on merits on the basis of records and with the assistance of the counsel for the Respondent -insurance company and particularly, having regard to the fact that the scales of compensation and methods of arriving at compensation for death are fairly settled by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v. DTC, reported as : 2009 6 SCC 121.
(2.) THE deceased was an income tax Assessee and it is not very clear from the order as to the nature of business that the deceased was having. He had been assessed to income tax at Rs.88998/ -for the year 1991 and he was paid tax of Rs.25380/ -. The net income was Rs.63,618/ -and the Tribunal was right in observing that his income could never have been only anything less than returned as income by the Income Tax Department. will, therefore, take the income as established, but instead of 1/3rd deduction, I will take 1/4th deduction and apply a multiplier of 16. The assessment of compensation is tabulated here below: JUDGEMENT_244_LAWS(P&H)2_2011.htm
(3.) THE amount of increase over what has been determined by the Tribunal will also attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The enhanced portion of the compensation amount will be distributed amongst the widow and the children only. The liability shall be in the same manner as determined by the Tribunal. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the party directly.;