Court modified the awarded compensation based on the application of future prospects and guidelines established by higher courts.

ORDER :

(Ashutosh Kumar, J.)

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants - claimants under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment dated 07.01.2017 (hereinafter to be referred as "impugned judgment") passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kekri (Ajmer) (hereinafter to be referred as the "learned Tribunal") in MAC Case No.142/2014 tilted as Rekha Devi & Ors. v. Hari Singh & Ors.

2. The appellants-claimants submitted a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.3,40,30,000/-, due to death of deceased - Bablu @ Mahaveer (hereinafter to be referred as "the deceased").

3. Learned Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, has awarded compensation of Rs.14,52,032/- to the appellants-claimants. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellants-claimants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submitted that the learned Tribunal has assessed income of the deceased Rs.5,434/-, keeping the deceased in the category of skilled labour, whereas on the date of accident, minimum wages of skilled labour was Rs.209/- per day, which should be Rs.6,270/- per month.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants further submitted that the learned Tribunal has also erred in awarding lesser amount under the head of future prospects. Furthermore, under the conventional head also, the award passed by the learned Tribunal is required to be enhanced, therefore, the appeal may be allowed.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly passed the award, which warrants no interference by this Court. Therefore, the appeal, being devoid of merit, may be dismissed.

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

8. It is revealed from perusal of the impugned judgment of the learned Tribunal that the appellants-claimants have averred in the claim petition that the deceased was earning Rs.4,30,000/- per annum by doing work of property dealing as well as animal husbandry. However, as the appellants-claimants failed to prove income of the deceased, the learned Tribunal, taking into account the minimum wages of a skilled labour, on the date of accident, calculated monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.5,434/-. It seems that the learned Tribunal has taken into account the minimum wages of a skilled labour i.e. Rs.209/- per day by calculating only 26 days of the month, which needs to be calculated on the basis of 30 days, which comes out to be Rs.6,270/- (209x30 = 6,270).

9. This Court finds that the learned Tribunal has awarded 50% of income under the head of future prospects. The Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017)16 SCC 680] has held that in case of self- employed person the increment of 40% as future prospects is to be awarded, if the age of the deceased/injured is below 40 years and 25%, if the age of deceased/injured is 40 to 50. Learned Tribunal has assessed age of the deceased to be 34 years, therefore, 40% of the determined income of Rs.6,270/- is to be added in the monthly income as per the directions given in the case of Pranay Sethi & Ors. (supra). Thus, total monthly income of the deceased comes out to be Rs.6,270 + 40% (Rs. 2,508/-) future prospects = Rs.8,778/- per month for the purpose of calculating the income of the deceased.

10. It is an admitted fact that the deceased is survived by wife, four children and his parents. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/5 of the amount under the