Bela M.Trivedi, J. - (1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellants -claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Fast Track) No. 1, Beawar District Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 93/06 (183/06), vide the award dated 15.2.07 whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,52,600/ - with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation, for the death of Shri Ramjan. The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the deceased Ramjan happened to be the son of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2, husband of the appellant No. 3, father of appellant Nos. 4 to 8 and brother of appellant No. 9. The appellants -claimants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,09,75,000/ - for the death of Shri Ramjan who died in the accident which had taken place on 15.2.06, when he was going on the motorcycle bearing Registration No. RJ -36 -1M -3148 from Pali border to Beawar and when the respondent No. 1, who was driving the tanker bearing Registration No. RJ -01 -GA -605, hit the motorcycle of the deceased. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record awarded the compensation as aforesaid vide the impugned award. Being aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the compensation.
(2.) THE learned counsel Mr. J.P. Gupta for the appellants -claimants has submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency benefit is very inadequate, inasmuch as the Tribunal has failed to consider the future prospects of the deceased. Placing heavy reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in case of Santosh Devi Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. : (2012) 6 SCC 421, he has submitted that the Tribunal ought to have considered at least 30% increase in the total income of the deceased over a period of time. He further submitted that their being more than five dependents of the deceased, the deduction on account of personal expenses should have been 1/5th and not the 1/3rd as directed by the Tribunal. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded very meager amount towards the loss of consortium and, therefore, the amount of compensation needs to be suitably enhanced. However, the learned counsel Mr. V.K. Gupta appearing for the Insurance Company has supported the impugned award passed by the Tribunal and submitted that the compensation being just and proper, the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
(3.) IN the instant case, neither the accident nor the involvement of the offending vehicle has been disputed by the respondents. The appeal has been preferred by the appellants -claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. As regards the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and come to the conclusion that the deceased must be earning Rs. 2400/ - per month and Rs. 28,800/ - per annum. However, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal has failed to consider the future prospects of the deceased. In view of the judgment in case of Santosh Dev. Vs. National Insurance Co. (Supra) when the person is self employed or is engaged on fixed wages, the future prospects of the deceased is required to be considered reasonable to the extent of 30% of his income at the time of death. If the said analogy is applied to the facts of the present case, it would be reasonable to guess that over a period of time, the income of the deceased would have increased by 30% of his income at the time of his death. Since his income has been taken as Rs. 2400/ - per month and Rs. 28,800/ - per annum, the 30% thereof would come Rs. 720/ - per month and Rs. 8,640/ - per annum. Hence for the purpose of calculating loss of dependency, the total annual income is required to be taken as Rs. 37,440/ -. Since the number of dependents i.e. the parents and the wife and children of the deceased were more than six persons, it could be reasonably presumed that the deceased would have spent 1/5th of his income towards his personal expenses, i.e. Rs. 7,488/ - per annum, for his personal expenses and therefore, the loss of dependency to the dependents would be 4/5th of his income i.e. Rs. 29,952/ - per annum. If the said figure is rounded off, the annual dependency loss would be Rs. 30,000/ - Since the Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 18, considering the age of the deceased, the total loss of dependency to the appellants -claimants would be Rs. 5,40,000/ -. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,000/ - towards loss of consortium, which also requires to be reasonably increased to Rs. 10,000/ -. Accordingly it is held that the appellants -claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 5,50,000/ - (5,40,000 + 10,000) towards the amount of compensation for the death of deceased Ramjan. In view of the above, the amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs. 5,50,000/ - from Rs. 3,52,600/ -. The respondents shall pay the difference of amount with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the appeal till realisation. The appeal stands partly allowed accordingly.;