IRSHAD ALI,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The instant First Appeal From Order has been filed challenging the judgement and order dated 25.5.2013 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 262 of 2011 by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, deciding the claim set up by the appellant of Rs. 11,74,000.00 by awarding Rs. 1,26,500.00 with the interest @ 6% per annuam.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the son of the appellant claimant was returning from Chitrakoot on 1.6.2011 on a motorcycle bearing registration no. U.P. 71 L-2292 along with his friend Amarjeet Singh and at Fatehpur Lucknow by-pass crossing, P.S. Kotwali while he was on the way to his village Adampur at about 12.00 hours, due to rash and negligent driving of the truck bearing registration no. U.P. 78 N-4611, the truck collided with his motorcycle due to which the son of the appellant and Amarjeet Singh were seriously injured and in a serious condition Parul Tiwari (deceased) was admitted in a hospital at Kanpur where he died during treatment on 8.6.2011. The tribunal on examination of evidence, material on record and on the basis of the age of the parents of Parul Tiwari (deceased) has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,26,500.00.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the multiplier applied on the basis of the age of the parents of the deceased is not legally sustainable in law in fact multiplier should have been selected on the basis of the age of deceased and in support of his argument, he relied upon the judgement in the case of Managing Director Banglore Metropolitan Transport Corporation v. Sarvo Jamma 2008 (2) TAC 756 . Next submission of learned counsel for the appellant is on the point of notional income of the deceased Parul Tiwari is that the deceased was unmarried and meritorious student and the income of the deceased Parul Tiwari should have been fixed by taking into consideration the minimum wages of Rs. 250/- per day which comes to the Rs. 7,500/- per month. Thus, the assessment of income made by the tribunal as Rs. 300/- is not justifiable in law and on this issue he relied upon the judgement of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Shashi Devi and Others 2015 (3) T.A.C. 339 (ALL.) and submitted that the minimum income should have been fixed as Rs. 4,500/- per month on notional basis and after deduction of 1/2 towards the personal expenses, the compensation should have been awarded. He further submitted that the tribunal has committed a manifest error of law while passing the impugned judgement in not considering the claim for the grant of future prospect in the present case. Learned counsel for the appellant next submitted that under the conventional head the claimant-appellant have been awarded only Rs. 20,000/-. The claimant-appellants are entitled to get under the aforesaid head Rs. 15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate.;