G.P.MITTAL, J. - (1.) THE Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs.4,21,000/- awarded in favour of the Appellants for the death of Amit Aggarwal, a bachelor who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 21.01.1999.
(2.) THE finding on negligence is not disputed by the Respondents and has thus attained finality between the parties. While dealing with the quantum of compensation, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) declined to believe the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D issued by the deceased's employer. It, therefore, took the minimum wages of a matriculate; tripled the amount towards future prospects, deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses and applied a multiplier of 11 to compute the loss of dependency. Assailing the impugned award, the following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellants: (i) The salary certificate Ex.PW1/D was duly proved by PW2 examined by the Appellants. The Claims Tribunal erred in declining to believe the salary of Rs.4,000/- per month on the basis of the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D. The age of the deceased's father on the date of his (ii) examination in the Court on 17.02.2003 was 53 years, thus he was aged 49 years on the date of the accident; the age of the mother would be a little less than that. Thus, the appropriate multiplier as per the age of the deceased's parents was Rs.13' instead of Rs.11' as taken by the Claims Tribunal. (iii) The Claims Tribunal made a deduction of 50% towards personal and living expenses. Normally, a deduction of 1/3rd is made under this head.
(3.) I have perused the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D. The deceased Amit Aggarwal had passed All India Senior School Examination (Class 12th) from CBSE in the Ist Division. He was pursuing B.Com (P) from Delhi University as an external candidate. PW2 Rajesh Tiwari's testimony regarding the deceased's employment with Praveen Oil Company was not challenged in the cross-examination. In the circumstances, the Claims Tribunal erred in disbelieving the salary certificate Ex.PW1/D. Relying on the same, I hold the deceased's income at the time of the accident as Rs.4,000/- per month. A perusal of PW1 Krishan Kumar's testimony shows that he was 53 years at the time of the recording of the testimony. The Claims Tribunal took his age as on the date of recording of his statement in the Court into consideration to apply the multiplier. Since the accident took place in the year 1999, he was aged 49 years at the time of the accident. The deceased's mother might be of the same age or a little younger to PW1. Thus, the appropriate multiplier is Rs.13' instead of Rs.11' as adopted by the Claims Tribunal.;