Compensation in motor accident cases must include all income components, excluding only income tax and professional tax, and future prospects should be factored into the multiplicand for just compensation.

JUDGMENT :

[ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.]

Heard. Admit. Heard finally by consent of both the learned counsel for the parties.

(2) The petitioners in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.236 of 2011, have filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, granted by the learned President, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, vide judgment and award dated 07.08.2018 in the said claim petition. The appellant No.1 is widow, appellant Nos.2 & 3 are daughters and appellant No.4 is mother of deceased Bhaskar Anandrao Shinganjude, who died in a road accident on 01.09.2009.

(3) The respondent No.1 is owner of the offending vehicle which was insured with the respondent No.2 on the date of the accident. The learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.52,23,520/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from 04.03.2011 i.e. date of presentation of the claim petition, till the date of realization of the amount. As stated above, the claimants seek enhanced compensation in the present appeal, since they are dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded. The respondents have not challenged the judgment and award.

(4) The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the deceased was working as Assistant Manager (Civil) with Larsen and Turbo Co. Limited at Delhi. He was drawing the salary of Rs.4,28,825/- per annum. In addition to this, he has received a sum of Rs.68,000/- towards Performance Linked Reward in the year 2009. He draws attention to the document at Exh.60 which is the Salary Slip issued by the employer and the Income Tax Return submitted in Form No.60 for the financial year 2009-10, which is at Exh.61. He states that while computing the loss of financial dependence the learned Tribunal has made deductions in the gross salary with respect to the amount paid on heads other than Income Tax and Professional Tax, which is not permissible. He states that the net salary is erroneously taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal. He also contends that the Performance Linked Bonus of Rs.68,000/- is also erroneously excluded while computing the amount. According to him, the total compensation payable towards loss of financial dependence would be Rs.69,08,085/- and Rs.7,65,000/- for the component of salary and Performance Linked Bonus respectively. As regards the amount of consortium, he contends that there are four dependents, the widow, two children and mother, who are entitled to an amount of Rs.40,000/- each towards consortium, however, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- only and therefore, according to him, an additional amount of Rs.1,20,000/- needs to be paid to the appellants towards loss of consortium. He, therefore, seeks enhancement in the amount of compensation to the extent of Rs.26,39,565/- over and above the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal.

(5) Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company contends that the loss of dependence is rightly computed by the learned Tribunal. The learned counsel also states that the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding interest on the component of future prospects. The learned counsel, therefore, contends that the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

(6) The respondent No.1-owner, though served has not entered appearance in the appeal.

(7) After hearing the parties, the following points arise for my consideration in the present appeal :

i) Whether the learned Tribunal has rightly computed the quantum of loss of financial dependence ?

ii) Whether the component of Performance Linked Bonus benefit can be taken into consideration while computing the loss of financial dependence ?

iii) Whether interest can be awarded on the component of future prospects ?

iv) Whether all the four dependents are individually entitled to receive the amount of consortium ?

(8) Point Nos. (i) & (ii) - It is now well settled that while computing the loss of financial dependence, entire income of the deceased