JUDGMENT :

S. Sujatha, J.

1. The insurer has filed this appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) challenging the judgment and award dated 10.09.2015 passed in MVC No. 2098/2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-11) ('Tribunal' for short).

2. The facts in brief are that the claimants being the parents and brother of the deceased - K.S. Yogesh preferred the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of deceased -K.S. Yogesh in the road traffic accident. It was averred in the claim petition that on 16.01.2014 at about 6.45 a.m., while the deceased - K.S. Yogesh was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-51-EE-6328 on service road of Hosur Main Road, near Veerasandra Gate, the driver of Indica car bearing registration No. KA-53-A-3792 (offending vehicle) dashed the said motorcycle of the deceased due to rash and negligent driving. On account of the said impact, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, he was shifted to Blossom Hospital for treatment. Despite the treatment given, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on the same day at about 11.30 p.m. in the said hospital.

3. It was contended that the deceased was the only earning member of the family. He was aged about 28 years and working as a Computer Operator at G.E. Company at Electronic City, Bengaluru; drawing the salary of Rs. 17,582/- per month and contributing the entire amount to the family maintenance. The untimely death of the deceased has caused great hardship and misery to the family. The accident having occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, the claimants are entitled to compensation.

4. On service of notice, the appellant - insurance company appeared and contested the matter admitting the liability of the insurer subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and provisions of the Act as well as valid and effective driving licence, valid registration certificate, fitness certificate and permit subject to confirmation of Section 64VB of the Insurance Act. It was contended that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence of the deceased; the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding the valid and effective driving licence as on the date of the accident and he was not qualified to hold or obtain the driving licence. Though the owner of the vehicle was served, he remained absent and was placed ex-parte.

5. On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and answered awarding total compensation of Rs. 32,92,688/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

6. Being aggrieved, the insurer has preferred this appeal insofar as the quantum of compensation awarded as excessive.

7. Learned Counsel for the appellant - insurer mainly argued that the deceased - K.S. Yogesh was drawing salary of Rs. 17,582/- per month as per Ex. P12 - Salary Certificate. In the cross-examination of PW 3, the employer has admitted that the deceased - K.S. Yogesh was receiving the salary of more than Rs. 15,000/- and he was not covered under the ESI Act. Ignoring the Salary Certificate at Ex. P12 and pay-slips for the months of October and November 2013 - Exs. P13 and P14, solely considering Ex. P15 - pay-slip for the month of December, 2013 where overtime allowance of Rs. 3,516/- was earned by the deceased, the Tribunal determined the monthly gross salary at Rs. 21,097/-. He further submits that the addition of 50% towards future prospects is not in accordance with law. Accordingly, learned Counsel sought for the reduction of the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

8. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants justifying the impugned judgment and award submitted that the Tribunal has rightly determined the mo