K. Kannan, J. - (1.) THE appeal arises out of claim for compensation for death of a male aged 35 years. He was partner in a stone crusher having invested Rs. 6 lacs and the income tax return showed that his own share of 40% profit aggregated to Rs. 2,01,052/ -. It was in evidence that he used to contribute about Rs, 10,000/ - for the family towards the maintenance and spent for himself about Rs. 5,000/ - per month. The Tribunal assessed a compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/ - without properly assigning the compensation for each one of the relevant heads. The manner of assessment as done by the Tribunal is wholly erroneous. In the course of appeal, although the widow had also joined along with children, she has been transposed as respondent by an order of Court when a representation was made on her behalf that she had remarried and she was not prosecuting the case for enhancement. I would take it, therefore, that her claim for enhancement would stand abated and the case would require to be considered only for the claim of the minor children and the mother of the deceased. The mother of the deceased has also expired during the pendency of the appeal and the assessment of compensation could, therefore, require to be considered only so far as the contribution of the deceased to the children. I would take the contribution to the children as 1/5th of the total income minus the deduction which I will take as Rs. 35,000/ - per year. I will apply a multiplier of 16 and assess the loss of dependence at Rs. 5,60,000/ - and add additional amount of Rs. 1 lac towards loss of love and affection.
(2.) IT is not possible to predicate the extent of compensation which the minor children had. The Tribunal had merely assessed Rs. 3,50,000/ - as compensation payable to all claimants including the sisters of the deceased. There could not have been a lawful claim for the sisters when there were widow, children and mother of the deceased. They could not have also treated themselves as equally entitled to the amount. Since the children themselves had not preferred an appeal initially challenging the apportionment, I take it that the amount of Rs. 3,50,000/ - was to be treated as equally partible and the amount which shall be deducted, shall be equivalent Rs. 1,00,000/ - (Rs. 50,000 x 2). The balance shall be Rs. 2,56,000/ - and it shall also attract interest @ 6% from the date of petition till the date of payment. The enforcement of the award shall be available against the insurance company. The award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.;