The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of future prospects and economic factors in determining compensation for motor accident claims.

S. Manikumar, J.

Quantum of compensation of Rs.14,58,000/- with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim till deposit and costs, awarded in M.C.O.P.No.5071 of 2004 dated 03.09.2015, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, [V Small Causes Court], Chennai, to the legal representatives of the deceased, is the only challenge. Therefore, there is no need to advert to the aspect of negligence and liability.

2. Deceased was stated to be a driver of a van bearing Regn.No.TCZ-8619. PW1 wife has deposed that, at the time of accident, as driver, he earned Rs.6,000/- per month, and Rs.40/- daily batta. However, no documentary evidence was filed. Taking note of the year of accident i.e., 2004, the tribunal, notionally fixed his monthly income as Rs.3,000/-per month. He was aged 32 years. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Santhosh Devi -Vs- National Insurance Company Ltd., reported in 2012(2) TNMAC 1 (SC), the tribunal decided to add 50% of the income towards future prospects, but added 100% of the monthly income. Tribunal rounded off the same to Rs.7,000/-. Thereafter, applied 16' multiplier. As the dependents were four, 1/4th has been deducted. Thus, the tribunal arrived at the loss of contribution to the family as Rs.10,08,000/-. That part, the tribunal has awarded Rs.2,00,000/- under the heads loss of love and affection to the respondents 2 to 5, minor daughters and parents of the deceased. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh and others Vs. Rajbir Singh reported in 2013 (2) TNMAC 55 (SC), the tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, The tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- under the head loss of estate and Rs.50,000/- under the head Funeral Expenses. In all, the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.14,58,000/-, as compensation, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim till deposit and costs.

3. Taking this court to the mistake committed by the Tribunal in addition of 100% of monthly income fixed and then, rounding off the same to Rs.7,000/- by a further addition of Rs.1,000/-, Mr. K.J. Sivakumar, learned counsel for the appellant-Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, submitted that the tribunal has committed a mistake, in computing the loss of contribution to the family. Sum of Rs.50,000/- awarded under the heads Funeral Expenses and Rs.1,00,000/- awarded under the head loss of estate, are also challenged.

4. Admittedly, the accident occurred on 30.3.2004, when the deceased was on the wheels of the Van bearing Regn.No.TCZ8619. Though, PW1, has deposed that at the time of accident, her husband earned Rs.6,000/- per month, and Rs.40/- Batta per day, the tribunal has grossly erred in fixing the monthly income as Rs.3,000/-. From the material on record, it could be seen that the deceased is survived by his wife, minor daughters and parents. To maintain a family, comprising of five members, including two minors, even in the year 2004, Rs.3,000/-, taken as the monthly income, would be too less. Having regard to the fact that the deceased as driver of the Van sustained injuries, taking note of the number of Dependants, consumer price index and inflation and such other economic factors, which prevailed in 2004, we deem it fit to accept the contention of PW1-Wife and accordingly fix the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.5,000/- and propose to compute the loss of contribution to the family.

5. Even taking for granted that the deceased had no future prospects in his career, as driver yet possibility of revision of income, in the subsequent years, cannot be brushed aside. On the aspect of future prospect, the tribunal ought to have considered addition of certain income under the head future prospects or prospect, as decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in C.M.A.No.3273 of 2014, dated 13.10.2015 [Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Tmt. Vennila, to which, one of us is a party (Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Manikuma