IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that future prospects must be considered in compensation calculations, leading to an enhanced award for the claimants.

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 02.05.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara in MAC Case No. 173/2011.

The learned Tribunal, vide impugned judgment/award dated 02.05.2016 awarded a sum of Rs. 11,40,840/- in favour of the claimants alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 17.02.2011.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a claim petition was preferred by the claimants with the submission that on 02.12.2010, Bhanwar Singh, accompanied by Satish Kumar, was traveling in a tempo bearing registration No. RJ-06-PA-1055. At approximately 8:15 PM, upon reaching the Chittorgarh-Bhilwara National Highway near Atoon, a trailer with registration No. RJ-26-GA-1178 owned by respondent No. 2 approached from the direction of Chittorgarh. The said vehicle being driven rashly and negligently, caused a collision, resulting in the fatality of Bhanwar Singh due to the sustained injuries. FIR No. 278/2010 pertaining to this incident was lodged at Police Station Sadar Bhilwara.

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

3. The appellants-claimants are dependants of deceased Bhanwar Singh. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,50,000/-. 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. 5,962/- awarded total compensation of Rs. 11,40,840/- in favour of the claimants- appellants, the break-up of which is as under:

Learned Tribunal also awarded interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.

4. Averring the compensation to be meagre, the claimants appellants have preferred the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants raised the following grounds:

(i) Firstly, the deceased was employed as a Senior fitter at Nitin Spinner Limited, Hamirgarh. However, the learned Tribunal erroneously overlooked the evidence (Exhibit-34) qua the monthly income of the deceased and rendered a nominal compensation award in favour of the appellants-claimants while assessing the income of the deceased to be only Rs. 5,962/- per month.

(ii) Secondly, the learned Tribunal erred in omitting to take into consideration the future prospects of the deceased while computing the loss of income which is in total contravention to principles/guidelines as laid down in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680.

(iii) Thirdly, the learned Tribunal committed a significant error in its adjudication by providing insufficient compensation qua the conventional heads.

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

6. Coming on the first ground regarding the income of the deceased, admittedly, pay slip of deceased drawn by Nitin Spinner Limited, Hamirgarh for November and December 2010 (Exhibit Nos. 34 & 35) have been placed on record.

A bare perusal of the same reflects that the deceased was drawing a Basic Pay of Rs. 6,200/- and House Rent Allowance of Rs. 1,240/- This Court is of the opinion that the learned Tribunal erred in taking into consideration the deductions qua loan, EPF and other advances while computing the salary of the deceased. This Court holds that the income