Dalip Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the award of the learned Tribunal and the record of the case.
(2.) This appeal has been preferred by the claimants who are wife and other dependents of the deceased Satyaprakash who died in a motor accident on 08.04.1993.
(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the learned Tribunal has erred in computing the age of the deceased as 50 years. He submits that the learned Tribunal has taken into account the age of the deceased as 50 years on the basis of the entry in the Post Mortem Report wherein the age of the deceased has been mentioned as 50 years. He submits that so far as the entry in the Post Mortem Report is concerned, the same has been recorded at the instance of the police officials who took the deceased after he met with the accident and the same has not been recorded at the instances of the claimants or any family member of the deceased. He submits that after the closure of the evidence, the appellants had produced before the learned Tribunal the copy of the electoral roll of the year 1993, the year when the deceased met with the accident, which is available on record at page C-13/9 wherein the age of the deceased Satyaprakash son of Radhakishan has been mentioned as 42 years. He submits that the claimant/appellant No.1, widow of the deceased, has deposed as AW-1 that the age of the deceased at the time of accident was 42 years and that stands corroborated from the entry in the electoral roll which was filed after closure of the evidence and fall within the scope of a public record not requiring formal proof.;