IMPORTANT POINT
The court recalculated compensation based on the deceased's potential earnings as a Mason, enhancing the total compensation awarded to Rs.11,82,312/- with interest.

ORDER :

1. The present misc. appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded vide judgment and award dated 04.10.2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan in MAC Case No. 400/2014 (N.C.V. No. 3154/2014).

The learned Tribunal, vide impugned judgment dated 04.10.2023 awarded a sum of Rs.9,36,712/- (after adjusting the amount of Rs.50,000/- awarded vide interim relief) in favour of the claimants along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 01.08.2013.

2. Brief facts as pleaded in the claim petition are that on 29.06.2013, Sunil Kumar was driving his Hero Puch bearing registration no. RJ 19 15M 0673 while going from Sangaria to village Biratiya. He was driving slowly and within the speed limit in the correct lane when a Bolero camper bearing registration no. RJ 19 GC 3334 being driven negligently and rashly on the wrong side of the lane, hit his vehicle. Unfortunately, due to this accident, Sunil Kumar sustained injuries and was taken to M.D.M Hospital where he was declared dead by the doctors.

The offending vehicle, on the date of accident, was insured with respondent No.3 – Insurance Company.

3. The appellants-claimants are the dependants of deceased Sunil Kumar. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,27,000/-. However, the learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence available on record and after hearing the counsel for the parties, while assessing the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.4,316/-, awarded total compensation of Rs.9,36,712/- (after adjusting the amount of Rs.50,000/- awarded vide interim relief) in favour of the appellants-claimants, the breakup of which is as under:

Learned Tribunal also awarded interest @ 6% per annum on the above amount from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 01.08.2013.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants argued that the learned Tribunal erroneously computed the income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.4316/- per month on basis of the wages of an unskilled labour whereas the deceased was a Mason and was earning Rs.25,000/- per month.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that keeping in view the age of the deceased, the possibility of increase in income and bright future of the deceased ought to have been considered by the learned Tribunal.

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

7. It is not disputed on record that the deceased was 27 years of age. The appellants-claimants, in their statements before the learned Tribunal averred that the deceased was a skilled Mason earning Rs.25,000/- per month. True it is that no document in support of the said statement/evidence has been placed on record but then this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the deceased was just 27 years of age and hence, had a huge possibility of increasing his income in future. Therefore, the computation of his income on basis of the minimum wages for an unskilled labour cannot be said to be reasonable. This Court therefore finds it proper to compute the income of the deceased at the minimum wages as payable to a semi-skilled labour at that point of time.

8. As per the Government notification dated 29.04.2013, the minimum wage