- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the claimants -appellants for enhancement of compensation amount awarded by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi.
(2.) THE facts which are not in dispute are that the deceased died in a motor vehicle accident. At the relevant time he was aged about 27 years. The case of the claimants was that deceased was a driver of Tractor No. BR -14J -2591 and was earning Rs.3,000/ -per month. In support of that, evidence was led and the employer of the deceased was examined and salary certificate was produced and proved which was marked as Ext.1. In spite of that, the tribunal proceeded to decide the compensation by taking the notional income of the deceased.
(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2007(3) JLJR 376. 6. For better appreciation, paragraph -4 of the said judgment is quoted herein -below: - "From bare reading of the aforesaid provision, it is manifestly clear that owner or the insurer shall be liable to pay compensation in case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising' out of use of the motor vehicles in the manner indicated in Second Schedule. Sub -section (3) of Section 163A provides that Central Government keeping in view the cost of living shall time to time amend the Schedule by issuing notification in the Official Gazette. Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act lays down quantum of compensation payable in case of death or permanent disablement by taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the annual income. Clause 6(a) very clearly provides that in case of death or permanent disablement of the non -earning person, sum of Rs.15,000/shall be taken as notional annual income of such person. In our considered opinion, therefore, notional income of Rs.15,000/ - shall be taken only when deceased or the injured was non -earning person and not an earning person. We are also of the considered opinion that in case of insufficiency of evidence with regard to earning of the deceased or the injured, the Court shall come to a finding on the basis of evidence as to what was the earning of the deceased or the injured instead of taking notional income for the purpose of determining' compensation. As a matter of fact, the notional income as contemplated in 163A read with para 6 of Second Schedule applies in case where there is a. death or injury of non -earning minor child or non -earning old person or persons who does not earn anything." 7. As noticed above, evidence was led by the claimants that monthly income of the deceased was Rs.3,0001 - and he died leaving behind his parents, widow and minor children. Taking into consideration all these facts, we assess the annual dependency of the deceased at Rs.24,0001 - and by taking 15 years of multiplier, the amount of compensation comes to Rs.3,60,0001 -. However, we are of the view that a lump sum amount of Rs. three lakhs as compensation would be just and reasonable. Mr. Ashutosh Anand fairly submitted that a sum of Rs.3,00,0001 - as compensation will meet the ends of justice. 8. We, therefore, allow this appeal and enhance compensation amount from Rs.1,62,0001 - to 3,00,0001 -. As such the Insurer of the vehicle, Respondent No. 2 as also the owner of the vehicle Respondent No. 3 are directed to pay the enhanced compensation amount together with interest as per direction passed by the tribunal within a period of two months from today to the claimants.;