1. ' This is suit for compensation under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. The facts as averred in the plaint and in the affidavit of ex parte proof indicate that A. Ghani suffered untimely death as a direct result of the negligence and rashness involved in carelessly driving Mini Bus No,841-939 by the defendant No,2 in the suit. The deceased at the time of the accident is said to have been driving his bicycle when the said Mini Bus, owned by the defendant No,!, and driven by the defendant No,2, crashed against the deceased and his bicycle due to which instantenious death of A.Ghani aforesaid was caused. F.I.R. No,227/89 was lodged and the present suit was filed. At the time of the accident, on 6-6-1989, the deceased is claimed to have been an employee of K.M.C. and his earnings were about Rs,1,500 per month. The deceased was about 44 years of age at the time. The normal expectancy in the family of the deceased is said to be at least up to 80 years.
2. Compensation in the sum of Rs,17,00,000 is claimed on the basis of normal earnings at Rs,700,000 and raise in life, inflation and the pecuniary loss to the estate, as ingredients bring forth, allegedly, a figure of Rs,10,00,000. The list of plaintiffs includes widow of the deceased and his six sons and daughters all but one of which number consists of minors.
3. ' The defendants have remained absent and the suit is posted for final disposal. Even though several adjournments were allowed at the stage of final disposal itself none of the defendants has appeared.
4. I am, therefore, constrained to decree the suit ex parte but it cannot be decreed as prayed. Normal rule as to expectancy of life, as followed by me, is 70 years. In exceptional circumstances, such as those indicated in para. 9 of the affidavit-in-ex parte proof a higher age expectancy can also be determined. Such is allowed in relation to the deceased at the level of 75 years. The age of the plaintiff No,1 is indicated to be 33 years and the deceased was obliged to maintain her throughout his life and such lady, being allowed average age expectancy of 70 years, could have outlived the deceased even if age expectancy of 75 years was to be reckoned in the context of the deceased.
5. Out of his earnings throughout his life span on a salary of Rs,1,500 per month it is difficult to assume that the deceased could have contributed anything more than Rs,1,000 per month towards the maintenance and uplift of his family. At such figure for 31 years the compensation would work out to be Rs,372,000. To this I would add another sum of Rs,128,000 in the context of possible advancements in life of which the deceased would reasonably be expected to bring home thebenefits and that includes also his provident fund, gratuity and other benefits at the time of retirement from K.M.C. service. The total compensation thus works to Rs,500,000. Plaintiffs suit, therefore, is decreed in such sum together with costs of the suit. Out of this plaintiff No,1 shall get 1/14th and minor's shares shall be deposited in Court and invested in long term securities by the Nazir.