' This is a suit for recovery of compensation under Fatal Accidents Act, 1855.
2. Case of the Plaintiff is that deceased Abdul Satter died in the factory premises of Defendant No,1 on 6-9-1983 as a result of inhalation of 'ammonia gas' caused due to burst of Ammonia container/drum in the factory lying in the Refrigerating Hall. The said container was locally fabricated from mild steel. The material of construction and joint-welding were of poor quality. The container was not subjected to pressure test which was mandatory. Hence the death of the deceased was caused due to negligent act of Defendants Nos.2, 3 and 4, who are employees of Defendant No,1 Company. Therefore, Defendant No,1 is vicariously liable for the act of Defendants Nos.2, 3 and 4 and all of them are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation for the death of deceased. At the time of the said accident the deceased was aged 36 years. He was expected to live up to the age of 65 years. Hence compensation has been claimed at Rs,11,00,000. The deceased has left one widow Mst. Shahzada Begum and two sons Khalid Mehmood and Arshad Mehmood.
3. Usual summons were issued to the Defendants. Defendants Nos.1 to 4 have chosen to remain absent and ex parte, while Defendants Nos.5, 6 and 7 have contested the suit and have filed written statement. On 21-10-1990 the plaintiff withdrew his suit against Defendant No,5, 6 and 7 on the ground that Defendant No,5 was owner of the building wherein the factory of Defendant No,1 Company is situated and therefore, neither Defendant No,5, nor his employees Defendants Nos.6 and 7 were liable.
4. The plaint is verified on oath and is accompanied by an affidavit of plaintiff. The plaintiff has filed affidavit-in-evidence. The plaint is accompanied by photocopy of F.I.R. And report of Inspector of Explosives.
5. The above evidence of the plaintiff has gone unchallenged and unrebutted. I, however, feel that the compensation which has been claimed by the Plaintiff is excessive even according to his own calculation. In my estimation reasonable compensation would be Rs,150,000. I, therefore, decree the Plaintiffs suit for a sum of Rs,150,000 against Defendants Nos.1 to 4 jointly and severally. I also allow interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing of suit till the recovery of the decretal amount. The costs of the suit shall be borne by the Defendants Nos.1 to 4. Suit against Defendants Nos.4, 6 and 7 has already been withdrawn, while suit is dismissed against Defendant No,8, who is also employee of Defendant No,5. Since all the heirs are living jointly with the plaintiff, I do not propose to make separate allocation of amount for each of the heirs.