The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper assessment of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, including the entitlement of claimants to add a percentage of the assessed income towards future prospects.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Pandit, J. - Both the claimants and insurer are in appeal assailing the judgment and award dated 3.8.2015 passed in MVC No.237/2013 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, Addl. MACT, Dharwad (for short, 'Tribunal').

2. The claimants are in appeal being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and praying for enhancement of compensation. Whereas, the insurer is in appeal on the question of liability saddled on it and also on the quantum.

3. The claimants are parents and sister of the deceased Srikrishna S Devaramani. A claim petition came to be filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation for the accidental death of Srikrishna S Devaramani in a road traffic accident on 6.11.2012 involving motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-05-HU-8420 and lorry bearing registration No.KA-14-A-7090. The accident involving the above vehicles and accidental death of the deceased is not in dispute in these appeals. In the claim petition, it is stated that the deceased was working as a Software Engineer in Nokia Siemens Networks at Bengaluru and getting a salary of Rs.70,000/- per month. It is further stated that the deceased was a bachelor and aged about 23 years as on the date of the accident. The insurance company in its statement contended that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the rider of the motor cycle i.e. deceased. It further contended that the deceased was not holding valid and effective driving license as on the date of the accident.

4. The claimants in support of their claim examined the claimant No.1-father of the deceased as PW1 and two other witnesses as PW2 and PW3 apart from marking the documents as per Exs.P1 to P15. On behalf of the respondent-Insurance Company, Ex.R1- insurance policy was marked with consent. The Tribunal on analyzing the material placed before it, awarded total compensation of Rs.33,90,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realization on the following heads:

While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/- per month, deducting 50% of the income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased and adopted multiplier of 18. Further, the Tribunal saddled liability on both the respondents and directed the respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount.

5. The claimants are in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation, whereas the insurance company is in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation as well as saddling of liability on it.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and learned counsel for the insurance company. Perused the trial Court records.

7. Learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the Tribunal committed grave error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/- by referring to Exs.P11 to P13-salary slips of the deceased. Learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal ought to have taken note of Basic Salary, HRA and other perquisites received by the deceased. If other perquisites are taken note of, the income of the deceased will have to be enhanced on higher side. Further, he would submit that the compensation awarded on the other heads are also on the lower side. Thus, he prays for enhancement of compensation by allowing the appeal filed by the claimants.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company would submit that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side and prays for reducing the same. Learned counsel referring to Exs.P11 to P13 would submit that for assessing net salary, Basic pay and HRA are to be taken into consideration and con