The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi, emphasizing the consideration of future prospects of the deceased and the award of sufficient compensation for loss of love and affection and funeral expenses.

JUDGMENT

Rameshwar Vyas, J. - The instant appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of quantum of compensation has been filed by the claimants against the judgment/award dated 27.6.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar in MAC Case No. 98/2008, whereby learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 5,37,000/- as compensation with interest @ 6% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

In a road accident which occurred on 26.8.2008, Ramchandra with one another person died. Claimants who are wife, minor children and mother filed the claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act with the averments that deceased was working as Helper in M/s. Manish Kumar Agarwal at Jaitsar and was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. At the time of accident he was 33 years old.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal while awarding compensation did not consider the future prospects of the deceased. As per principles laid down in the case of National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi & Ors., AIR 19 2017 SC 5157, 40% of the income should have been added to the income of the deceased while calculating the loss of income. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that looking to the number of claimants, only 1/5 of the income could be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, whereas, learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3 amount in this regard, which is not correct. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Tribunal has erred in not relying upon the income certificate (Exhibit-15) produced by the claimants. He also submits that no amount has been awarded in the head of loss of love and affection. Only Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded for funeral expenses.

5. Learned counsel prays to enhance the quantum of compensation appropriately as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra).

6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the appellants have not proved the income certificate as mentioned in Exhibit-15. Learned counsel submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and fair.

7. Having regard to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that since the income certificate (Exhibit-15) has not been proved by producing the employer or his authorized agent, the learned Tribunal did not commit any error in not relying upon the income certificate. The accident took place on 26.8.2008, hence, the income of Rs. 3,000/- based on minimum wages for skilled labour at that relevant time, assessed by the learned Tribunal is just and fair. However, learned Tribunal failed to add 40% of income towards future prospects, which ought to have been added. Since the claimants are six in numbers, hence, only 1/4th of the income should have been deducted in the head of personal expenses of the deceased. Learned Tribunal was also under obligation to award sufficient amount in the head of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.

8. As per judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants are entitled to get Rs. 70,000/- in the conventional head, which includes, loss of estate, loss of love & affection and funeral expenses subject to increase of 10% of the sum after every three years as per the principles enunciated in the above case by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

9. In view of above circumstances, the claimants are entitled to get compensation in the following terms:-