The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal principles related to compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, specifically focusing on loss of dependency, future prospects, conventional heads, and multiplier to determine the compensation.

JUDGMENT :

GAURANG KANTH, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation amount awarded by the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South East District/Saket Courts, New Delhi in Suit No. 327/2010 vide its Award dated 20.09.2012.

2. The learned Tribunal vide its impugned Award dated 20.09.2012 held Respondent No. 3 herein/Insurance Company of the car liable to pay compensation to the Appellants. The relief granted by the learned Tribunal is as under:

Facts of the case

3. Brief facts of the case as noted by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal are as under:

“On 11.02.2010, the deceased was standing with his motorcycle bearing no. DL-38-BL-9905. He was waiting at the gate of RTO Office, Vasant Vihar to meet the RTO Officials. At about 10.00 AM a car bearing no. DL-30-BD-2733 being driven by respondent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner came at a fast speed from the side of Nelson Mandela Marg and took a sharp UTurn. Respondent no. 1 could not control the car, hit the motorcycle of the deceased and ran over him. He was taken to Trauma Centre, ALLMS by a Constable in a private car where he was declared brought dead. Respondent no. 2 was the owner of the car and it was insured with respondent no. 3. A case was registered vide FIR 44/10 at the police station Vasant Vihar. SHO of the police station Vasant Vihar filed a Detailed Accident Report. It was clubbed with the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners. In the report, the Investigating Officer had verified the driving license of the respondent no. 1 and also filed the copy of the charge sheet containing the postmortem report and other documents as per which the cause of death was shock due to multiple injuries produced by blunt force object.”

4. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 8,03,800/- in favour of the claimants and directed Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company to deposit the said amount with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. Against the impugned Award, the present Appeal is preferred.

Submissions of the Appellants

5. Mr. S.N. Parashar, learned counsel for the Appellants contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the deceased as per his vocation. He further contended that deceased was 27 years of age and at the time of accident, he was pursuing MBA final year from Sikkim Manipal University. While pursuing his MBA he was working in a private company and was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month. Learned counsel further contended that the deceased has appeared for his final year MBA examination and has received an appointment letter for the post of Assistant Manager, Finance on a monthly salary of Rs. 30,000/- per month. He further contended that the appointment letter has been filed as Ex.PW-1/17, however, the learned Tribunal without taking into account the appointment letter, computed the head “Loss of dependency” on the basis of proved salary of Rs. 8,000/- which is arbitrary and in contravention of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashvin Bhai Jayanti Lal Modi vs. Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma, 2014 (11) SCALE 427. Learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of this Court dated 07.03.2018 passed in MAC. APP. No. 376/2017 titled as Bharti AXA Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Upender Kumar Shastri.

6. Learned counsel for the Appellants further contended that in terms of the dicta of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, AIR 2017 SC 5157, an addition of 40% of the established income s