The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles for determining compensation in cases where the claimant is not a dependent, and the method of computation of compensation for loss of dependency and loss to the estate under Sections 1A and 2 of the Fatal Accidents Act.

J.R. Midha, J.

The appellant has challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs. 4,93,000/- has been awarded to the appellant. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.

2. The accident dated 11th February, 2001 resulted in the death of Parminder Kaur Rowe. The deceased was survived by her husband who filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.

3. The deceased was aged 31 years at the time of the accident. The appellant is her husband who was about 38 years at the time of the accident. There are no children out of the wedlock of the appellant and the deceased. The deceased was working as Executive Assistant with M/s. Invensys India Private Ltd. at a monthly salary of Rs. 20,000/-. The employment of the deceased was proved by appointment letter dated 9th May, 2000 - Ex.PW-1/13. Form-16 dated 30th April, 2001 relating to the Income Tax deducted by the employer was proved as Ex.PW-1/14. The appellant claimed that the deceased was also Director in the Private Limited Company of the appellant named H.R. Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax returns of M/s. H.R. Solutions Pvt. Ltd. were proved as Ex.PW-1/16 to Ex.PW-1/18. However, no proof of the income of the deceased from M/s. H.R. Solutions Pvt. Ltd. was placed before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal, therefore, took the income of the deceased after deductions to be Rs. 13,000/- on the basis of the appointment letter Ex.PW-1/13. The appellant was not dependent upon the deceased and the learned Tribunal took the loss of estate of the appellant as 1/4 of the income of the deceased and applied the multiplier of 12 to compute the loss of dependency at Rs. 4,68,000/-. Rs. 15,000/- have been awarded towards loss of consortium and Rs. 10,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total compensation awarded is Rs. 4,93,000/-.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellant has urged the following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:

(i) The income of the deceased be taken to be Rs. 35,000/- per month.

(ii) The future prospects of the deceased be taken into consideration.

(iii) The loss of estate be taken to be 1/2 of the income of the deceased.

(iv) The multiplier be enhanced from 12 to 16.

(v) The compensation be awarded for loss of love and affection.

(vi) The rate of interest be enhanced from 7% to 7.5%.

5. The learned Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased to be Rs. 13,000A on the basis of the appointment letter, Ex.PW-1/13. As per Ex.PW-1/13, the deceased was getting following emoluments:      

6. The learned Tribunal has taken the basic salary and H.R.A into consideration. The finding of the learned Tribunal as to the income of the deceased to be Rs. 13,000/- per month is correct and is upheld.

7. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased was also assisting her husband in H.R. Solutions Pvt. Ltd. in which the deceased was a Director. However, no proof of income in this regard has been filed by the appellant and, therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim of the income of the deceased from H.R. Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

8. The learned Tribunal has not taken the future prospects into consideration. The deceased had a permanent employment and was employed with M/s. Invensys India Private Ltd. as Executive Assistant since 9th May, 2000 and she continued in the employment till the date of her death on 10th/11th February, 2001. As per the appointment letter, the probation period of the deceased was six months which was completed on 9th November, 2000 and, therefore, the employment of the dec