Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral):— By this judgment, appeal as well as cross-objections shall stand disposed of.
2. Surjit Kumar, aged about 30 years had died in a motor vehicular accident which took place on the intervening night of 9th and 10 March, 2017. Only dispute which has been argued before this Court is with regard to the quantum of compensation.
3. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has submitted that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 10,000/- per month without any evidence in support thereof.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimant has submitted that Surjit Kumar was a Transporter and owner of a trailer-Multi-Axles and Registration Certificate has been produced on file as Ex.P2. Hence, she submitted that rather the income assessed is on the lower side.
5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has further submitted that on account of increase in the income with reference to future prospects, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has enhanced the income by adding 50% which should be 40% as per the judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case of National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (10) SC 450.
6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has further submitted that on account of conventional heads, Rs. 2,25,000/- has been awarded which can at the most be Rs. 70,000/-, which is as follows:—
i)
Loss of love and affection
Rs. 15,000/-
ii)
Loss of consortium
Rs. 40,000/-
iii)
Funeral Expenses
Rs. 15,000/-
7. Learned counsel for the claimant does not join the issue on these submission of learned counsel for the Insurance Company.
8. On examination of the evidence available on the file, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was owner of trailer, his income cannot be treated at par with that of unskilled labour, whose minimum wages are Rs. 7,560/-. In such circumstances, the income assessed by the Court is not on the higher side. A owner of the trailer which is having Multi-Axles, income assessed, cannot be said to be on the higher side.
9. With regard to the other argument, since counsel for the respondent has fairly stated that as per the judgment passed by the Constitution Bench in the case of National Insurance Company's case (Supra), the amount payable has to be re-worked as under:—
Death Case
Name of the deceased
Surjit Kumar
Date of Award
13.10.2017
Amount of compensation awarded by MACT
Rs. 25,20,000/-
Date of Accident
09/10.03.2017
Age of the deceased
30 years
Occupation
Unskilled Worker
Heads
Awarded by the Tribunal
Awarded by the High Court
Income assessed
Rs. 10,000/- per month
Rs. 10,000/- per month
(+) future prospects
+ (50%) = Rs. 5,000/-
+ (40%) = Rs. 4,000/-
Rs. 15,000/- per month
Rs. 14,000/- per month
Annual Dependency
Rs. 15,000/- × 12 = Rs. 1,80,000/-
Rs. 14,000/- × 12 = Rs. 1,68,000/-
(−) Deduction (1/4th)
(−) Rs. 45,000/-
(−) Rs. 42,000/-
Total
Rs. 1,35,000/-
Rs. 1,26,000/-
Multiplier
Rs. 1,35,000/- × 17
Rs. 1,26,000/- × 17
= Rs. 22,95,000/-
= Rs. 21,42,000/-
Conventional Heads
Loss of Consortium
Rs. 1,00,000/-
Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of love and affection
Rs. 1,00,000/-
Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses
Rs. 25,000/-
Rs. 15,000/-
Total
Rs. 25,20,000/-
Rs. 22,12,000/-
10. The amount of compensation shall be payable alongwith interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the date of the claim petition till the payment.
11. In view of the above, the present appeal and cross-objections are disposed of.