The main legal point established is that deductions from the deceased's salary should be included in the income assessment, and future prospects should be granted to the claimants.

JUDGMENT

1. Instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants- appellants against the judgment and award dated 29.06.2017 passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Laxmangarh, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Motor Claim Case No.111/2016 whereby an amount of 43,71,560/- was awarded as compensation on account of death of Daya Ram in the accident occurred on 22.03.2016.

2. Learned Tribunal after framing the issues and evaluating the evidence on record and after hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants-appellants and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.43,71,560/- under various heads in favour of the claimants-appellants.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased Daya Ram was working on the post of Teacher at Government Primary School, Village Jakhopur, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar and at the time of his death, his age was 43 years 8 months and 10 days and his monthly salary was Rs.43,510/-. Counsel further submitted that in order to prove the income of the deceased, salary certificate (Ex.17) issued by the Block Elementary Education Officer, Tehsil Ramgarh District Alwar produced on the record, which clearly indicates that the monthly salary of the deceased was Rs.43510/-. Learned counsel further submitted that under various heads i.e. GPF, State Insurance, LIC, PMFI and Tax, deductions of Rs.12055/- have been made.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal while passing the award, has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.31455/- only, while it is the settled principle of law that except income tax, other deductions i.e. GPF, State Insurance, LIC and PMFI, are the components of salary/income of the employee and while assessing the income of the deceased, these components should be added in the income of the deceased, so, under these circumstances, after deducting the income tax, monthly salary of the deceased should have been assessed as Rs.41,450/-, but the Tribunal has erred in assessing the salary of the deceased as Rs.31455/- per month.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the appellants has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Indira Srivastaba & Ors. reported in 2008(1) R.C.R. (Civil) 359, Sunil Sharma & Ors. Vs. Bachitar Singh & Ors. reported in 2011 (2) KLT 451 wherein in identical situation, the deductions were treated as components of the salary of the deceased and the compensation was awarded accordingly.

6. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not granting future prospects in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. Learned counsel further submitted that recomputation of the award in the present case may be done in the light of the judgments referred above.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal while deciding the claim petition of the claimant-appellant has rightly taken into consideration all the factors while calculating the award in this case on the anvil of the evidence produced before it. Thus, the judgment dated 29.06.2017 does not call for any interference by this Court. Learned counsel, however, is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and the settled position of law on the issue raised in this appeal with respect to assessment of income of and with respect to recomputation of the award in the present case in the light of judgments Indira Srivastaba (supra), Sunil Sharma (supra) and Pranay Sethi (supra).

8. I have considered the submissions made at Bar and gone through the judgment dated 29.06.2017 as well as the other relevant documents available on record