The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles from the Uphaar Tragedy case to compute compensation in motor accident claims and the assessment of contributory negligence.

C.M. Appl. 21019/2017

1. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the appellant accepts notice.

2. The application is allowed and the name of respondent No.2 is corrected as Manju @ Aneeta Devi instead of Manju. The amended memo of parties be filed within one week.

3. Application is disposed of.

C.M. Appl. 21181/2017

4. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the appellant accepts notice.

5. The delay in filing the cross-objections is condoned. Application is disposed of.

C.M. Appl. 21180/2017

6. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the appellant accepts notice.

7. The cross-objections are taken up for hearing along with the appeal. Application is disposed of.

MAC. APP. 59/2015 and Cross-Objections

8. The Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.7,31,188/-to respondents No.1 to 4 which is under challenge in this appeal. The appellant is seeking reduction of the award amount whereas respondents No.1 to 4 are seeking enhancement of the award amount.

9. On 12th July, 2009 at about 02:30 a.m., Faujdar Yadav was returning from Jaipur to Delhi in his car bearing No.DL-3C-AF-5357 when he hit a stationary truck bearing No.GJ-6Y-8038 from behind which resulted in fatal injuries. Faujdar Yadav was survived by his widow, one son, one daughter and father who filed the application for compensation before the Claims Tribunal. The deceased was aged 52 years and was a driver by profession earning Rs.8,000/-per month.

10. The Claims Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.4,358/-as income of the deceased, added 15% towards future prospects, deducted 1/4th towards his personal expenses and applied the multiplier of 11 to compute the loss of dependency as Rs.4,96,188/-. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1 lakh towards loss of love and affection, Rs.1 lakh towards loss of consortium, Rs.10,000/-towards loss of estate and Rs.25,000/-towards funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded is Rs.7,31,188/-.

11. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the hearing that the deceased was contributory negligent and, therefore, the compensation amount is liable to be reduced on the ground of contributory negligence. It is further submitted that the future prospects should not be taken into consideration. The reduction is also sought on the ground that the personal expenses of the deceased be increased from 1/4th to 1/3rd.

12. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 seeks enhancement of the award amount on the ground that the income of the deceased be taken as Rs.8,000/-per month. It is submitted that the deceased was a professional driver and was earning Rs.8,000/-per month at the time of the accident.

13. It is well settled that it is not mandatory to resort the minimum wages in each and every case. Reference in this regard may be made to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, AIR 2012 SC 100 in which 59 persons died in Uphaar tragedy and the Supreme Court granted compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-to the victims of above 20 years of age and Rs.7,50,000/-to the victims below 20 years of age on the basis of multiplier method. The Supreme Court applied the multiplier of 15 and deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses. The income of the victims aged more than 20 years was assumed to be Rs.8,333/-per month and that of victims aged less than 20 years was assumed to be Rs.6,249/-per month. The computation of the compensation awarded by the Supreme Court would be as under :

For victims aged more than 20 years:-

(Rs.8,333/-less 1/3rd)x 12 x 15 = Rs.10 lakhs.

For victims aged less than 20 years:-

(Rs.6249/-less 1/3rd) x 15 = Rs.7.5 lakhs.

14. It is relevant to note that the Uphaar tragedy took place on 13June, 1997 and the minimum wages at the relevant time were less than Rs.2600/-. Although there was no proof of the income of the victims, the Supreme Court did not find it proper to apply the minimum wages.

15. This Court has applied the principles laid down in Uphaar tragedy case to compute the compensation in United India Insuranc