The main legal point established in the judgment is the calculation of compensation for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident, considering the deceased's income, personal expenses, and future prospects, as well as relevant legal precedents.

JUDGMENT

Birendra Kumar, J. - This appeal has been filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle act, 1988. appellants are not satisfied with the quantum of compensation decided by Motor accident Claim Tribunal No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan in Claim Case No.962/2014.

By the impugned award dated 09.05.2017, the learned Tribunal awarded Rs.29,64,000/- along with 6% interest from the date of application against claim of Rs.97,47,152/-.

2. In brief, the case of the claimants is that Sohan Lal Sood aged about 51 years, who was husband of claimant-Manju Devi and father of claimant-Hitansh, was crossing road to purchase medicines on 20.09.2014 at about 07:30 p.m. at the same time, a rash and negligent motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ-14-BX-0976 dashed against him causing serious injuries which resulted in death of Sohan Lal on 21.09.2014 while getting treatment in the referred hospital. For the accident aforesaid, Galta Gate Police Station case No.335 dated 21.09.2014 was registered and after investigation, police submitted charge-sheet. Ex.12 is the certificate of insurance which shows that the offending motorcycle was insured with respondent No.2-National Insurance Company Limited. The factum of motor vehicle accident and insurance of the vehicle is proved by the oral and documentary evidences available on record and are not challenged in this appeal.

3. Mr. Kapil Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants contends that without any basis, the Tribunal deducted Rs.2338/-against income-tax payment whereas the salary certificate of the deceased would show that at the time of his death, Sohan Lal was paying Rs.1244/- as income-tax. Grievance is that 1/3rd deduction against personal expenses of the deceased is also not justified. The learned Tribunal has not considered award of any amount against future prospect of the deceased. Multiplier of 11 has been applied by the Tribunal which should have been at much higher pedestal considering the prospect of deceased. The interest should have been 12% instead of 6% as awarded by the Tribunal.

4. Mr. Rishipal agarwal, learned counsel appearing for Natonal Insurance Company contends that just and adequate compensation has been decided by the Tribunal and the statutory purpose is not to make excessive compensation.

5. Considering the number of dependency which includes the wife and a son aged about one and half years, 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses of the deceased is consistent with the standard adopted in Sarla Verma's case reported in 2009 (6) SCC 121. Therefore, the same requires no interference. Likewise considering the age of the deceased which was between 50 to 55 years, the appropriate multiplier would be of 11. Hence, the same requires no interference.

Ex.15 is salary certificate issued by the Employer in respect of the deceased, who was a Clerk in the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur. The said certificate shows that gross salary of the deceased was Rs.32,397.70/- including Rs.225/- as transport allowance. The deduction shows that Rs.1244/- was being deducted against income-tax. Deposition of a.W.3-N.K.Gaur, who is the Chief Manager in the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, would show that the monthly salary of the deceased in July, 2014 (the month of accident) was enhanced to Rs.37,693.95/- w.e.f. 01.11.2012. Thus, the actual monthly income of the deceased on the date of death was Rs.37,693.95/- taken as Rs.37,694/-.

There is nothing on record to suggest that on the enhanced amount, double income-tax would be payable. Therefore, permissible exclusion for the purpose of income-tax may be taken as Rs.1500/- instead of Rs.1244/- after enhancement of monthly salary. Thus, Rs.1500/- against income-tax payment and Rs.225/-which was transport allowance, must have been spent against transportation, are fit to be excluded to ascertain the loss of dependency. Thus, the loss of dependency is calculated as Rs.37,694/- minus Rs.1725/- equal to Rs.35,969/-. 1/3rd is deductible for perso