JUDGMENT :

ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.

1. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sidhant Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents.

2. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 05.06.2018, passed by the learned Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jorhat in MAC Case No. 16/2012.

3. The case of the claimant in brief is that while the deceased was travelling by a motorcycle and was waiting at the crossing to go towards Pudukkottai Road, near Airport entrance, the vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-49/AW-4514 driven in a rash and negligent manner came and hit him from behind and as a result, the victim sustained grievous injuries. It is also pleaded that the victim was immediately taken to KMC Speciality Hospital where he succumbed to his injuries on 07.11.2011, during the course of treatment. It is the further claim that the deceased was aged about 43 years at the time of his death and he was earning Rs. 23,196/- per month as a CISF employee.

4. The claimant exhibited the pay slip as Exhibit-2 which is a computerised salary certificate issued by the Deputy Commandant, CISF. The deceased was working as a Head Constable which was proved by adducing evidence through one Sri R. Narayanasamy. The claimant exhibited as many as 12 (twelve) documents including post mortem report, death certificate, prescription etc. The owner of the offending vehicle did not contest the case and accordingly the same proceeded ex-parte against him.

5. The Insurance Company filed their written statement and had taken the usual pleas such as maintainability of the claim, want of cause of action etc. It was also claimed that the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-49/AW-4514 had no valid driving license and it was not duly insured. The respondent No. 4, who is the owner of a motorcycle, which was been driven by the deceased i.e. the vehicle bearing Registration No. KA-19-S/3838, deposed that the deceased was his friend and he is the owner of the bike which was driven by the deceased on the fateful day.

6. The claimant examined herself as PW-1 and proved the exhibited documents. The learned Tribunal below after considering the evidence came to a conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-49/AW-4514 (Maruti Swift) and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the deceased in the alleged accident. After elaborate discussion, the learned Tribunal below came to a definite conclusion that the offending vehicle was insured at the time of the accident. Thereafter, relying on the last salary certificate of the deceased and taking note of the age of the victim and relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, awarded an amount of compensation of Rs. 33,73,552/- and also awarded Rs. 15,000/- each against funeral expenses and loss of estate and Rs. 40,000/- for loss of consortium.

7. Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel has confined his argument to the ground that though the pay slip of the claimant was exhibited, the same is a computer generated document and there was no endorsement from the issuing authority nor did any one came to prove the pay slip and as such the learned Tribunal below ought not to have relied on such document. Mr. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel further contends that in view of the decision of a Coordinate Bench in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Champabati Ray and Others (MAC App. No. 378 of 2017), the claimants are not entitled for interest on future prospect.

8. Coming to the first contention, it is established beyond doubt that the deceased was a Head Constable in CISF. It