(O&M) A.S.JHINJHERIA vs LAKHBIR SINGH

SARITA RANI 2026.05.05 17:51 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order FAO No.5464 of 2002 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:069534
me of accident, therefore, the Insurance Company was given recovery rights. 3. Assailing the aforesaid award, it is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that deceased was drawing salary of `14,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has taken into considera
on only an amount of `5,000/- per month as the loss of dependency, without any jus
fica
on. 4. It is no
ced that the Tribunal has taken into considera
on the fact that father of the deceased was ge(ng pension of `3,245/- per month. I agree with the conten
on of learned counsel for the appellant that simply because the father was ge(ng pension of `3,245/- per month, could not be a reason to deduct that amount from the salary of the deceased. Even otherwise, once it is not in dispute and the cogent evidence was produced regarding the income of the deceased to be `14,000/- per month, which he was drawing as a salary as he was a Flying Officer, the same was liable to be taken into considera
on. 5. The deceased was admi.edly 25 years of age at the
me of accident. Being less than 40 years of age, 50% is liable to