Hon'ble MIDHA, J.—The appellants have challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- has been awarded to them. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.

2. The accident dated 4th November, 1988 resulted in the death of Jisha Jose. The deceased was survived by her parents who filed claim petition before the learned Tribunal.

3. The deceased was aged 8 years at the time of the accident and was a student of Convent of Jesus and Merry School, Bangla Sahib, New Delhi.

4. The learned Tribunal has awarded a lump-sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the appellants.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant refers and relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Farzana, MAC APP. No.13/2007 decided on 14th July, 2009 in which compensation of Rs.3,75,000/- has been determined in respect of the death of a child aged 7 years, following the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court in the cases of Manju Devi vs. Musafir Paswan, VII (2005) SLT 257, Sobhagya Devi vs. Sukhvir Singh, II (2006) ACC 1997, Syam Narayan vs. Kitty Tours & Travels, 2006 ACJ 320, R.K. Malik vs. Kiran Pal, III (2006) ACC 261, R.K. Malik vs. Kiran Pal, 2009(8) Scale 451. This Court held as under:-

“4. In the case of Manju Devi vs. Musafir Paswan, VII (2005) SLT 257, the Hon'ble Supreme Court awarded compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- in respect of death of a 13-years old boy by applying the multiplier of 15 and taking the notional income of Rs.15,000/- as per the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:-

“As set out in the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for a boy of 13 years of age, a multiplier of 15 would have to be applied. As per the Second Schedule, he being a non-earning person, a sum of Rs.15,000/- must be taken as the income. Thus, the compensation comes to Rs.2,25,000/-"

5. The case of Sobhagya Devi & Ors. vs. Sukhvir Singh & Ors., II (2006) ACC 1997 relates to the death of a 12-year old boy. Following the decision of the Apex Court in Manju Devi’s case (supra), the Rajasthan High Court awarded Rs.2,25,000/- by applying the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. The case of Syam Narayan vs. Kitty Tours & Travels, 2006 ACJ 320 relates to the death of a child aged 5 years. This Court relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in Manju Devi’s case (supra) awarded compensation to the parents by applying the notional income of Rs.15,000/- and multiplier of 15 as per the Second Schedule and further awarded Rs.50,000/- for loss of company of the child as also pain and suffering by them. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:-

“3. By and under the award dated 5.12.2003, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- has been awarded to the appellants. While awarding sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to appellants, learned M.A.C.T. has held that the income of the deceased child was incapable of assessment or estimation. Recognising that every parent has a reasonable expectation of financial and moral support from his child, in the absence of any evidence led, learned M.A.C.T. opined that the interest of justice requires that appellants are compensated with the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.

4. Had the Tribunal peeped into the Second Schedule, as per section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it would have dawned on the Tribunal that vide serial No.6, notional income for compensation in case of fatal accidents has been stipulated at Rs.15,000/- per annum.

5. In the decision reported as Manju Devi V. Musafir Paswan, 2005 ACJ 99 (SC), dealing with the accidental death of 13 years old boy, while awarding compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Apex Court took into account the notional income stipulated in the Second Schedule being Rs.15,000/- per annum.

6. In the instant case, baby Chanda was aged 5 years. Age of the appellants as on date of accident was 28 years and 26 years respectively as recorded in the im

Click Here to Read the rest of this document