M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) THIS appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the judgment and award dated 18th December, 2007 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 36/2005, whereby he has awarded a sum of Rs.7,40,000/ - as compensation for the death of Shibani Saha in a motor vehicle accident. It appears that the deceased Shibani Saha while going to Hirapur she was dashed by a tempo bearing No.JH 10E 5758, as a result of which she received grievous injury and died on the spot. She was aged 54 years and was a railway employee. She was earning Rs.13,559/ - per month. The case was contested by the appellant -Insurance Company mainly on the ground that the claimants are not the dependants of the deceased and hence they are not entitled to compensation. The Tribunal, on the basis of Ext.B, found that the gross salary of the deceased was Rs.12,250/ -. Hence annual income of the deceased was Rs.1,47,000/ -. After deducting 1/3 out of annual salary, the annual dependency was assessed at Rs.98,000/ -. After taking a multiplier of 8 the Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.7,84,000/ -.
(2.) MR . D.C.Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellant assailed the impugned award mainly on the ground that the amount of compensation assessed by the Tribunal is highly excessive and exorbitant for the reason that the claimants are not the dependants. The learned counsel submitted that the claimants are the sons and daughters aged 32 years, 36 years and 37 years and they were not dependants on the earning of the deceased and in that view of the matter they are not entitled to compensation. Learned counsel then submitted that the two claimants are the married daughters and they were not dependants on the earning of the deceased. Learned counsel further submitted that the tribunal has committed error of law in assessing the compensation on the gross salary of the deceased. Learned counsel produced before us a certified copy of Ext.B, which is salary particulars of the deceased. According to this, the net salary, which the deceased was getting was at Rs.6,632/ -. Prima -facie we are of the view that the Tribunal has committed mistake in taking the gross salary for the purpose of calculating compensation. As per Ext.B, the take -home salary of the deceased was Rs.6,632/ -. If 1/3rd out of the net salary of the deceased is deducted, the monthly annual dependency comes to Rs.4,422/ - and the annual dependency comes to Rs.53,064/ -. Since the deceased was aged 54 years a multiplier of 10 would be most appropriate. Hence the compensation amount comes to Rs.5,30,000/ -. In our view, therefore, a compensation of Rs. 5,30,000/ - would be just and reasonable compensation.
(3.) SO far as the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant that the claimants being not the dependant on the deceased, they are not entitled to compensation cannot be accepted. Admittedly, the claimants are sons and daughters of the deceased and are legal representatives. Even assuming that the claimants were not dependants on the earning of the deceased, they are entitled to compensation for the death of the deceased.;