Parents have a legitimate expectation of financial support from their children, irrespective of gender, and are entitled to compensation for the death of their minor children.

1. The claimant Rupinder Singh was taking his young nieces Simrat Jot and Mandeep Jot to School when the truck DHG-3417 coming from the opposite direction hit into his scooter. In the resultant accident both the children were killed while Rupinder Singh sustained injuries. It was the finding of the Tribunal that this accident had been caused entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the truck-driver. A sum of Rs. 3,000.00 was awarded as compensation to Rupinder Singh for the injuries caused to him. No compensation was, however, awarded to the parents of the two young girls, as it was held that it had not been shown that they had suffered any pecuniary loss on account of the death of their children. Herein lies the challenge in appeal, including a claim for enhanced compensation in the case of claimant Rupinder Singh.

2. The material on record would show that when on the date of the accident. Rupinder Singh was examined by P.W. 4 Dr. Parmodh Kumar Kohli of the Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh, he was found to have six injuries on his person. These being :-

1. Closed head injury.

2. Blunt trauma to the abdomen.

3. Abrasion on the back.

4. Lacerated wound in front of right leg.

5. Two punctured wound front of left thigh.

6. Abrasion front of left leg.

3. Next to note is the certificate exhibit P 5 issued by Dr. K. K. Mahajan, who operated upon Rupinder Singh during his stay in the hospital. According to this Certificate, the operation revealed a perforation in the duodenal and free blood in the peritoneal cavity. The perforation was over-sewn. There were no other internal injuries. According to the certificate, Rupinder Singh remained admitted in the hospital from Nov. 25, 1978 to Dec. 8, 1978.

4. Turning now to the statement of the claimant; P.W. 5 Rupinder Singh, it will be seen that according to his testimony, he developed some post-operation problems and had to be admitted to the Post Graduate Institute again for another 12 days.

5. Mr. Ujagar Singh appearing for the claimant Rupinder Singh claimed compensation under three main heads. These being; loss of business, cost of medical treatment and compensation for general damages meaning thereby pain and suffering and loss of amenities of life. It deserves mention at the very out-set that except the bald statement of the claimant, there is no evidence on record to show the extent of the loss of business, if any, that the claimant suffered on account of this accident or of the amount spent by him on his medical treatment. In this situation, no interference with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, under these heads, would indeed been warranted. The Tribunal had awarded Rs. 1,000.00 for medical expenses and Rs. 2,000, - for loss of business.

6. The Tribunal, I however, clearly fell in error in making no award for pain and suffering and loss of amenities of life which the claimant undoubtedly had to endure on account of his injuries. Considering the nature and extent of the injuries suffered by him, the operation he had to undergo and the duration of his consequent disabilities, it would be fair and just to hold him entitled to a sum of Rs. 12,000.00 on this account. In other words, the total compensation payable to the claimant Rupinder Singh deserves to be enhanced to Rs. 15,000.00 .

7. Taking up now the claim for compensation put forth by the parents of the two minor children, killed in this accident, the evidence on record would show that Simrat Jot deceased was only about 8 years of age at the time of her death, while her younger sister Mandeep Jot was only 4 years old at that time. P.W. 3 Balbir Singh, their father was 38 years old when this accident occurred.

8. It is well settled that parents do have a legitimate expectation of financial support from their children particularly in their old age when their children are gainfully employed. Further it is indeed a fallacy to assume that merely because the deceased happens to be a minor girl, her parents would