JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. A. J. Saikia, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The appellant has challenged the impugned Judgment and Order dated 16.05.2015 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Kamrup, Guwahati, Assam in MAC Case No. 2496/2012, by which the appellant has been directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs. 27,31,100/-to the respondents/claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till final payment.

3. The brief facts of the case is that an accident was occurred on 26.12.2011 near Puwai Centre Tea Estate under Digboi P.S. The story of the claimants/respondents is that on the day of accident on 26.12.2011, the deceased Ajudhya Konwar was going by driving his own Maruti Car (A-Star) by the extreme left side of the road towards his office, and on the way, when he reached near Puwai Centre tea Estate, he was knocked down by the offending vehicle vide No. JH-02-M-7944 (Truck) coming from the front side in a rash and negligent manner as a result of that he sustained grievous injury on his person and died on the spot. At the time of accident the deceased Ajudhya Konwar was a Head Assistant, under Govt. of Assam, in the office of Sub-Divisional Officer, Margherita and his monthly salary was Rs.35,000/-and he was aged about 55 years and accordingly a claim petition was preferred by the respondents/claimants. The learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.2, Kamrup, Guwahati, Assam in MAC Case No. 2496/2012, directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs. 27,31,100/-to the respondents/claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till final payment

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Insurance Company is not raising any dispute regarding the other part of the award that has been made by the learned Tribunal below. However, Mr. Saikia, learned counsel submits that the claimant is not entitled for interest on future prospects. In support of such submission, Mr. Saikia relies on a judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed in MACApp./378/2017 vide order dated 01.10.2019 in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd –vs- Smti Champabati Ray and 5 Ors. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is extracted herein below:-

“Another ground of challenge to the impugned judgment is that the learned Tribunal had awarded interest on future prospects, which could not be done. In the case of Khusboo Chirania @ Kanta Chirania v. Kamal Kumar Sovasaria, reported in 2018 0 Supreme (Gau) 966 and in the case of Nasima Begum V. Keramat Ali, reported in 2019 0 Supreme (Gau) 507, this Court has stated no interest on future prospects should be given. Though no reasons have been enunciated in the above judgments, the reasons for the same seems to be due to the fact that future prospects is relatable to an income to be received in the future and as such, there could not be any loss to the claimants for the payment of future prospects, at the time the deceased met with the accident. The reason for awarding interest on the compensation amount, minus the future prospects is due to the fact that though the loss of dependency starts from the date of the accident and the compensation amount is computed on the date of the Award of the Tribunal, interest is awarded to compensate the loss of money value on account of lapse of time, such as time taken for the legal proceedings and for the denial of right to utilize the money when due. However, future prospects is with regard to the probable income to be received in the future and as such there is no requirement to compensate the claimant by way of future interest, for the loss that is to occur in the future, as the future is yet to happen. Further, future prospects is given for the entire future and as such, the