JUDGMENT :

NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J.

1. The aforesaid appeals have arisen from the judgment and award dated 21.02.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in Claim Case No. 383/2016 titled as Smt. Asha Singhal and Others vs. RSRTC and Others, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.51,14,940/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition in favour of the claimants-appellants (for short ‘the claimants’).

2. CMA No. 2504/2017 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas CMA No. 2215/2017 has been filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the RSRTC) challenging the judgment & award passed by the Tribunal on the various grounds.

3. CMA No. 2504/2017-Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal had wrongly considered the income of the deceased as Rs.55,405/- per month instead of Rs.56,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimants also submits that there is unrebutted evidence that deceased was earning Rs.56,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal had not awarded the amount towards the future prospects. The deceased was a Government Servant and working as A.En. So, claimants are entitled to 30% of the deceased’s income towards future prospects. Learned counsel for the claimants also submits that the Tribunal has awarded a very meagre amount towards the loss of consortium and love & affection, whereas it should be Rs.2,00,000/- to each claimants. So, award of the Tribunal be modified.

4. CMA No. 2215/2017-Learned counsel for the RSRTC submits that the Tribunal had committed an error in granting compensation to the claimants. Learned counsel for the RSRTC also submits that in FIR, the bus number was mentioned as “4846” but in the claim petition, the bus number was mentioned as “3583”. So, claimants hatched a conspiracy to got the claim amount and they had falsely implicated the Bus No. RJ-23-PA 3583. Learned counsel for the RSRTC also submits that deceased and Hari Om Prakash Gupta fell down on the stones of the hills on account of dragging with electric wires. To get the claim, they had filed the false claim petition before the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the RSRTC also submits that the Tribunal wrongly considered the income of the deceased as Rs.55,405/- per month because wife of the deceased was getting pension of Rs.31,201/- per month. So, pension be deducted from the income of the deceased. Learned counsel for the RSRTC also submits that the Tribunal had wrongly awarded Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of consortium to the wife of the deceased and Rs.1,00,000/- to the children for love and affection, whereas it should be Rs.40,000/- as a lump sum. Learned counsel for the RSRTC also submits that the Tribunal wrongly awarded the amount towards the funeral expenses as Rs.25,000/- whereas it should be Rs.15,000/-. So, award of the Tribunal be modified.

5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimants as well as learned counsel for the RSRTC.

6. It is an admitted position that deceased was Assistant Engineer in Electricity Department. As per the Salary Certificate Ex.15, he was getting salary of Rs.55,405/-. So, in my considered opinion, the Tribunal had not committed any error in calculating the income of the deceased as Rs.55,405/- per month and rightly deducted Rs.6,000/- as income tax but the Tribunal had not awarded any amount towards the future prospects. As per the age of the deceased, claimants are entitled to get 15% of the deceased’s income towards future prospects. The Tribunal has awarded a very huge amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the loss of consortium and Rs.1,00,000/- for love and affection to claimant Nos.2 to 5. So, in my considered opinion, as per judgment pro