The court established that minimum wage standards must be applied for compensation calculation, ensuring fair inclusion of future prospects and family entitlements in wrongful death claims.

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 and award dated 15.04.2013 passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in MAC Case No.337/2012, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,09,780/- to the appellants-claimants (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimants').

2. The claimants submitted a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.47,00,000/-. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the issues and evaluated the evidence on record. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants and passed the impugned judgment and award. Hence, the present appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in passing the impugned judgment and award. Learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased only Rs.3510/- per month, whereas the deceased was providing the services of tuition and used to earn Rs.6000/- per month.

4. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Tribunal has also erred in not awarding future prospects, as the deceased was 18 years of age at time of accident and he was self employed and, therefore, the claimants are entitled for 40% future prospects.

5. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding interest @ 6% per annum. It is settled law that interest on the compensation amount ought to have been awarded at least @ 12% per annum.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company has supported the impugned judgment and award and contended that there is no merit in this appeal and the same be dismissed.

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

8. Learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment has observed that no evidence has been produced to prove that the deceased, by doing the work of tuition was earning Rs.6000/- per month at the time of accident. Therefore, learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.3510. The date of occurrence is 27.04.2012. In the year of 2012, minimum wages of unskilled labour was Rs.147 per day.

9. In the opinion of this Court, if the income of the deceased, as alleged in the claim petition was not proved by the claimants, then in order to calculate the loss of income, the learned Tribunal should have considered the income of the deceased to be equivalent to the daily wages as applicable on the date of incident. As per the claimants, profession of the deceased at the time of accident, was tuition work. Therefore, the deceased should have been treated to be a skilled labour. At the time of accident minimum wages of unskilled labour was Rs.155 per day, therefore, monthly income of the deceased comes to be Rs.155X30 = Rs.4650/-.

10. Learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of future prospects. Age of the deceased was 18 years on the date of accident, therefore, increment of 40% to the future prospects, as per the direction given in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 is also to be made. Thus, total monthly income of the deceased comes out to be Rs.4650 (155 X 30) + 40% (Rs.1860/-) future prospects = Rs.6510/- per month for the purpose of calculating the loss of income.

11. As the deceased was unmarried, therefore, learned Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% amount of the total income under the head of personal expenses of the dece