The credibility of documentary evidence, consideration of income tax deductions, and application of relevant legal provisions in compensation assessment.

JUDGMENT :

1. The Award dated 05.03.2013 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Samba, whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 36,70,072/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the payment is made, is challenged by the appellant-Insurance Company on the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased while awarding compensation; that the deductions as required were not taken into consideration qua the salary of the victim deceased; that the Tribunal also erred in granting compensation while considering the future prospects of the victim and finally the dependency factor is wrongly considered by the Tribunal of the deceased. The respondents-claimants have appeared through their counsel. As there is no dispute that the vehicle was duly insured with the appellant-Insurance Company and the liability of the Insurance Company is otherwise not in dispute, therefore, there was no necessity of hearing the respondent Nos. 2 & 3, owner and driver of the offending vehicle, in the appeal.

2. The claimants being not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal have also filed the appeal bearing MA No. 279/2013 for enhancement of compensation. As both the appeals arise out of the same award they are taken for consideration together and being disposed of by common judgment.

3. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased victim who was Hawaldar in the Army as Rs.22,500/- and the future loss of income on the same is also assessed at 50% of Rs. 22,500/-. The learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously argued that the certificate filed by the claimants qua the salary of the deceased is not proved as no one from the army appeared before the Tribunal to prove the certificate. The submission is that the appellants cannot be granted compensation on the basis of the salary certificate produced by the appellants in view of the aforesaid fact. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants-respondents has argued that there is no reason to apply strict rules of evidence in motor accident cases.

4. It is not in dispute that the certificate filed by the claimants before the Tribunal has not been proved though the same appears to have been issued by the Major/ Lieutenant Colonel of the 71 Armed Regiment where the deceased Bodh Raj was serving at the time of his death. The evidence produced on behalf of the claimants also speak of the victim having salary to the tune of Rs. 25,000/-. It appears that the salary certificate on the record has not been disputed otherwise by the respondents before the Tribunal. There is no reason to doubt the certificate which is placed on record by the claimants. No doubt the rules of evidence cannot be over looked yet at the same time the strict compliance of the same in case like the present one may only resulting to hardship for the claimants and deprive them of their legitimate compensation more so when the salary certificate is stated to have been issued on behalf of the Army. The court does not find any reason to not look into and give credence to the salary certificate which is detailed one as it includes the deductions also which were being made from the salary of the deceased Bodh Raj. The certificate states the total salary of the deceased as Rs.22,453/- per month and that deduction to the tune of Rs. 4,737/- being made monthly, thus, the net payment after deduction comes to Rs. 17,716/-.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant has rightly argued that while assessing the compensation the tax which the employee was liable to pay is required to be taken into consideration and deducted from the salary in case the deceased is held to be liable to pay tax. The learned counsel for the appellant has placed on record the income tax slab for the year 2011-2012 which is applicable in the case in hand.