Compensation for loss due to death in a motor accident must include proper assessment of income, application of multiplier, consideration of future prospects, and adherence to established legal principles for just compensation.

JUDGMENT :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

Heard Ms. P. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

2. This appeal, under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, is directed against the judgment and award dated 08.06.2016, passed in MAC Case No. 931/2013, by the learned Additional District Judge (FTC) No. 3, Kamrup(M), Guwahati-cum-Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, in MAC Case No. 931/2013.

3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are briefly stated as under:

“On 11.04.2013, at about 1.30 p.m., Smt. Kareng Kropi, the mother of the present appellants/claimants, was travelling along with claimant/appellant No. 1, Ms. Hirjir Ingtipi in a Santro-LE vehicle, bearing Registration No. AS-09-B-2641, from Bakalia side towards Diphu side, and when the vehicle reached Patradisha Singnar Basti, the driver of the said vehicle lost control over the vehicle and hit against a concrete culvert by the side of the road and fell into a ditch by the side of the road. As a result of the said accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries on her person and she succumbed to her injuries on the next day. The said accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said vehicle and in connection with the said accident, Bokolia P.S. Case No. 14/2013, under Sections 279/304A IPC was registered. The deceased at the time of accident was working as Assistant Teacher of Mirmili Adong L.P. School and her monthly salary was Rs. 24,867/-, and she left behind the claimants i.e. one daughter and one minor son. The family was totally dependent on the income of the deceased and there is no other alternative source and the entire family is suffering financially.

Thereafter, the appellants herein being claimants, preferred a petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, claiming a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- being the compensation. The opposite party, i.e. respondent No.1, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., contested the case of the claimants by filing a written statement, wherein it had taken a stand that no authentic document like age certificate, income certificate, income tax return etc. were submitted with regard to the claim of the accident and the amount of compensation was high, excessive, exorbitant and baseless, and therefore, it was contended to dismiss the petition.

Upon the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal had framed the following two issues:

(i) Whether the late Kareng Kropi died of injuries she suffered in the alleged road accident dated 11.04.2013 involving vehicle No. AS-09-B-2641 and whether the said accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle?

(ii) Whether the claimants are entitled to get any compensation and if yes, to what extent and by whom amongst the opposite parties, the said compensation amount be payable?

Thereafter, recording evidence and hearing both the parties, the learned Tribunal had assessed the compensation as under:

(i) Loss of dependency : Rs. 80,000/-

(ii) Funeral expenses : Rs. 25,000/-

(iii) Loss of love and affection : Rs. 50,000/-

Total : Rs. 1,55,000/-

And the learned Tribunal had further directed that the amount shall carry interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case till payment.”

4. Ms. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned judgment and award on two counts. Firstly, Ms. Bhattacharya submits that while assessing the loss of dependency, the learned Tribunal has not applied the multiplier; and sec