Mahesh Bhagwati - (1.) HEARD the Learned Counsel for the appellant and carefully perused the relevant material on record.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has impugned the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baran, merely on one ground that the learned Tribunal did not pass an award in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v/s. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in, 2009 (2) TAC 677 (S.C.), wherein it was observed that an addition of 50% of actual salary to the actual salary income of the deceased towards future prospects should be adopted as rule of thumb, in case the deceased had a permanent job and was below 40 years of age. Hence, the amount towards loss of income is required to be computed in the light of the said judgment. Having considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the appellant, I deem just and proper to remit the case to the learned Tribunal with the direction that the Tribunal should consider the income of the deceased Pradeep, as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), wherein it has been observed that an addition of 50% of actual salary to the actual salary of the income of the deceased toward future prospects should be adopted as a rule of thumb, where the deceased had a permanent job and was below the 40 years of age and decide the claim petition afresh. The learned Tribunal is directed to compute the amount of compensation as directed above.
(3.) TO sum up, the appeal succeeds and impugned award stands set -aside.;