The assessment of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act should consider the deceased's income, and it cannot be assessed less than the minimum wages payable by the State of Punjab.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The instant Appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 18-9-2019 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, whereby the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala to the tune of Rs.13,77,000/- has been reduced to Rs.6,14,320/-.

3. The appellants are the widow, widowed mother and three minor children of deceased Sanjiv Virinder Singh, who died in a motor vehicular accident. The deceased was less than 40 years of age. Being fully aware of the minimum wages prevalent in the State of Punjab, coupled with the earning capacity of the deceased, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month and consequently awarded the above-mentioned amount of compensation.

4. The High Court, on the other hand, proceeded on the premise that the deceased was an agriculturist and one of the co-owners in the agricultural land and even after his death, the agricultural land can be managed by the family of the deceased. On this analogy, the High Court reduced the income of the deceased to Rs.2,700/- per month.

5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at a considerable length and on perusal of the material available on record, we find no justification for the High Court to assess the monthly income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.2700/-.

6. It is the categorical case of the claimants that the deceased was agriculturist, contractor and was also running the business of fisheries at Patiala and earning Rs.20,000/- p.m.

7. Be that as it may, the monthly income of the deceased cannot be assessed less than the minimum wages payable by the State of Punjab. That apart, it is beyond one's comprehension that the deceased would have catered his large family with a meagre amount of Rs.2700/- per month. The approach of the High Cour is completely unrealistic. Applying these principles, the income assessed by the Tribunal was fair, just and equitable.

8. We are inclined to accept the said assessment made by the Tribunal.

9. For the reasons, as aforesaid, the appeal is allowed; the impugned Judgment of the High Court dated 18-9-2019 is set aside and the award dated 5-4-2002 passed by the Tribunal, Patiala is restored in its entirety.

10. The compensation amount shall be paid to the appellants along with interest accrued thereon, if any, within a period of two months reckoned from the date of communication of a copy of this order, after adjustment of the amount which has already been paid to the appellants.