JUDGMENT :

RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. This appeal is by the claimants against the award dated 18.03.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Janjgir-Champa, C.G. in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 30/2015 awarding total compensation of Rs. 40,59,052/- with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of application till its realization, fastening liability on the Insurance Company. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their description before the Tribunal.

2. As per averments made in the claim petition, on 31.05.2015, deceased Geetaram, aged about 55 years, earning Rs. 62,037/- per month as ADC Attendant Grade-I, working in C.G. State Power Transmission Company Limited, Bhilai, was going from railway station Naila to Siwni in auto-rickshaw along with others passengers. However, on the way non-applicant no. 1 by driving the vehicle truck hyva bearing no. CG10-C-7568 (hereinafter referred to as ‘offending vehicle’) in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the said auto-rickshaw, as a result of which, deceased-Geetaram suffered grievous injuries on his body and succumbed to the same. At the time of accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant no. 2 and insured with non-applicant no. 3.

3. On claim petition being filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act to the tune of Rs. 95,56,107/- the Tribunal considering the evidence led by both the parties passed an award as mentioned above.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that though he has raised various grounds in the memo of appeal, however, he is not pressing all those grounds and is assailing the award on the following grounds:

(i) that income of the deceased has wrongly been considered by the Tribunal as Rs. 45,841/- per month whereas it should have been Rs. 62,037/- per month looking to the job of the deceased and pay slip of deceased i.e. Ex.A-13.

(ii) that no amount towards future prospect has been granted to the claimants.

(iii) that the Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3 towards personal and living expenses whereas it should have been ¼.

(iv) that the amount awarded under the conventional heads also being on the lower side deserves to be enhanced suitably.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/owner and respondent No. 3/insurance company support the impugned award and submit that the Tribunal considering all the relevant aspects of the matters has rightly awarded compensation which needs no interference by this Court.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. As regards the income of the deceased, admittedly the deceased was working as ADC Attendant Grade-I in C.G. State Power Transmission Company Limited, Bhilai and used to receive net salary of Rs. 45,841/- per month as per pay slip Ex.A/13. The Tribunal for the purposes of assessment of his salary has taken net salary of Rs. 45,841/- whereas the Tribunal should have taken the basic pay i.e. Rs. 26,050/- + dearness allowance i.e. Rs. 31,791/- of the deceased employee, which comes to Rs. 57,841/- and the Tribunal has wrongly taken the net salary of the deceased employee as Rs. 45,841/-. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I propose to recompute the salary of the deceased employee on the basis of Ex.A-13 (pay slip) as Rs. 57,841/- per month.

8. So far as dependency upon the deceased is concerned, the deduction of 1/3 made by the Tribunal towards personal and living expenses of the deceased also cannot be faulted with for the reason that the appellant No. 2, who is the daughter of the deceased, has already married and is residing in her matrimonial home, therefore, for the purpose of assessing dependency of appellant No. 2, cannot be considered as dependent of the deceased at the relevant time. Thus, considering the number of dependents on the dece