IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that compensation for deceased minors must reflect notional income and apply appropriate multipliers for just compensation.

ORDER :

(Nupur Bhati, J.)

1. The instant misc. appeal, seeking enhancement, has been preferred by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter as ‘the Act’) against the judgment and award dated 06.01.2016 (hereinafter as ‘the impugned award’) passed by MACT Bhilwara (hereinafter as ’the learned Tribunal’) in MAC Case no. 446/2013 (filed under Section 166 of the Act), whereby the learned tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,15,000/- along with interest @6% from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e., 24.12.2012 to the appellants/claimants and held the respondents/non-claimants jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensation.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 29.10.2012 a bus bearing reg. No.RJ-36-PA-0738 driven by the respondent No.1 in rash and negligent manner hit the daughter of the appellants-claimants and due to the injuries sustained by her, she succumbed to death. The deceased daughter was 15 years old at the time of the accident and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by doing the work of broom making and other labour work. Subsequently, the appellants/claimants filed the claim petition-MAC Case no. 446/2013 under Section 166 of the Act before the learned tribunal, seeking compensation on account of the death of the child. After service upon the respondents, the respondent no.1 did not appear before the learned Tribunal, accordingly, the Tribunal proceeded ex parte against the respondent no.1 and the respondent No.2 appeared and filed reply to the claim petition.

3. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties learned tribunal framed four issues. The appellants/claimants examined 1 witness and produced some documentary evidences whereas the respondents examined 1 witness and produced documentary evidence before the learned tribunal. After hearing the parties and on the basis of the material available on record, the leaned Tribunal partly allowed the MAC case no. 446/2013 vide the impugned award and awarded Rs. 3,15,000/- along with interest @6% (from the date of the filing of the claim petition i.e., 24.12.2012 as compensation to the appellants/claimants and held respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensation.

4. Aggrieved by the impugned award, the instant misc. appeal has been preferred by the appellants/claimants.

5. Since there is no dispute as to the facts of the case the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants has restricted his submissions only to the quantum of the compensation as awarded by the learned tribunal.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants submits that the learned tribunal has erred in awarding such meager compensation on account of the death of the deceased child.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and calls for no interference by this Court.

8. Heard the counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the material available on record.

9. This court finds that the learned tribunal has awarded the lump-sum amount of Rs. 3,15,000/- as compensation to the appellants/claimants. However, this court finds that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishan Gopal and Ors. Vs. Lala and Ors. [(2014) 1 SCC 244], where the age of the deceased child was 15 years has taken the notional income of the deceased child as Rs. 30,000/- p.a. looking to the facts and circumstances. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kurvan Ansari and Ors. Vs. Shyam Kishore Murmu and Ors.[(2022) 1 SCC 317], where the age of the deceased child was 7 years, has taken notional income of the deceased child as Rs. 25,000/- p.a. and after applying Multiplier of 15 granted total of Rs. 3,75,000/- under the head of ‘loss of dependency’ and also an amount of Rs. 40,000/- to each of the parents under the head of filial consortium and Rs.15,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court i