K. Kannan, J. - (1.) BOTH the appeals relate to same accident in which the Scooterist died and his wife, who was pillion rider has suffered injuries. The claim for compensation for death is subject matter of FAO No. 4710 while FAO No. 4709 of 2003 is appeal for compensation assessed for injuries.
(2.) THE accident had taken place on 17.2.2002. The deceased was aged 25 years and said to be working as mechanic in a private workshop. The owner of the workshop had been examined who gave evidence to the effect that he used to pay Rs.4200/ - per month and on the days he was doing any extra work, he used to pay him Rs.4500/ -. The Tribunal did not accept this evidence as correct, took the contribution to the family at Rs.1500/ -, applied the multiplier of 10 and assessed compensation at Rs.180,000/ -. I will not find fault with the Tribunal in not fully accepting the evidence of the owner when he ought to have had better proof of income than mere oral assertion. The technical qualification of the deceased himself was not available for the Tribunal to take income as stated by the witness. I will rework the compensation taking income at average Rs.2500 but provide for a prospect of increase as well. I shall re -work the compensation taking multiplier of 18 and provide for loss of consortium to the wife and loss of love and affection for the parents, on the scales in the light of the some recent decisions that have been rendered recently by the Supreme Court. The tabulation setting out various heads is as under: - There shall be an award for Rs. 7,05,000/ - and the amount in excess over what was awarded will also attract interest @7.5% from the date of the petition till the date of payment. The amount shall be disbursed in such a way that the wife takes 2/3rd of the compensation and the parents take 1/3rd of the additional amount. The liability shall be in the same manner as has been directed by the Tribunal.
(3.) THE award stands modified and the appeal is allowed to the above extent.;