Prashant Kumar, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is for enhancement of compensation awarded by District Judge cum - M.A.C.T., Godda in M.A.C.T. No. 54 of 2008.
(2.) IT appears that an application filed by Claimants under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act and after considering the evidences and other materials available on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation amount as per Schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is submitted by Sri Manoj Kumar Sah, learned Counsel for the appellants that the learned court below had taken into account that the notional income of the deceased was Rs. 15,000/per annum and he has also applied a multiplier of 15 as per Schedule II, but he deducted 1/3rd amount of aforesaid notional income towards maintenance of deceased, which is illegal.
(3.) IN my view the aforesaid submission of Sri Manoj Kumar Sah is misconceived and against the Second Schedule of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In the foot note of Second schedule , it is clearly mentioned that The amount of compensation so arrived at in the case of fatal accident claims shall be reduced by 1/3rd in consideration of the expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining himself had he been alive.;