Proper assessment of the deceased's income and the age of the deceased are crucial factors in determining compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Pandit, J. - The claimants are before this Court in this appeal not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under judgment and award dated 06.11.2012 in MVC No.21/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT-VIII, Badami.

2. The claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the accidental death of Sri.Ramprasad Dharmanna Talawar which occurred on 10.10.2011 involving KSRTC bus bearing No.KA-19/F-2613. The accident involving the above said vehicle and the accidental death of the deceased is not in dispute in this appeal. The claimants are before this Court praying for enhancement of compensation.

3. In support of their case, the claimant No.1, wife of the deceased was examined as PW.1 apart from marking documents as Exs.P.1 to P.7. No evidence was let in on behalf of the respondent-Corporation.

4. The Tribunal on analyzing the material placed before it, awarded total compensation of Rs.14,57,912/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.12,541/- p.m. added 30% towards future prospects since he was aged 45 years and was having permanent employment. The Tribunal adopted multiplier of 14 and deducted 1/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. The claimants not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation are before this Court praying for enhancement of compensation.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, Sri.Ashok R Kalyanashetty and the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation, Sri.F.S.Dabali appearing through video conference. Perused the trial Court records.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the deceased was working as driver in the respondent-Corporation and the income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.12,541/- p.m. is on the lower side. He submits that only income tax and professional tax are to be deducted from the gross salary of Rs.19,120/- as indicated in Ex.P.6 salary slip issued by the respondent- Corporation for the month of July-2011. Thus, he prays for revising the monthly income on the higher side. The learned counsel would further submits that the claimants No.2 to 5 who are minor daughters, son and mother of the deceased, would be entitled for Rs.40,000/- each on the head of parental and filial consortium as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co.Ltd vs. Nanu Ram and others, (2018) ACJ 2782 . Thus, he prays for enhancing the compensation.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just compensation which needs no interference. He further submits that Ex.P.6 pay slip for the month of July-2011 would indicate the gross salary at Rs.19,120/- which includes overtime allowance which cannot be included or considered as his regular income. Therefore, the overtime amount cannot be included while assessing the income. Further, he also submits that the pay slip for the month of July-2011 also indicates arrears of Dearness Allowance which also cannot be considered as income. He submits that for assessing the income, basic pay, HRA, CCA, Night Halt Charges, SOT and Washing Charges could be considered. Further, he submits that since the claimants are five in number, deduction at 1/4th is proper and correct.

8. The learned counsel for the respondent- Corporation would also submit that the Corporation has filed I.A.No.1/2017 under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC seeking permission to produce office order as additional document dated 24.01.12017 to show that the deceased date of birth was 01.06.1965, which means as on the date of the accident, the deceased was aged 46 years 4 months and taking the said age application of 14 multiplier is not proper and 13 multiplier would be proper. Thus, he prays for allowing the application and