The main legal point established in the judgment is the correct calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including the treatment of deductions from the deceased's salary, addition of future prospects, and the application of the multiplier based on the age of the deceased.

Avneesh Jhingan, J.

The present appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide award dated 01.02.2010.

2. An accident took place on 31.01.2008. Karandeep Singh, aged 25 years, was going from Amritsar to Jammu in a Maruti Car bearing registration No.PB-02AF-8288. On reaching near Kadial Colony Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur, the car was struck by a rashly and negligently driven truck bearing registration No.PB-02AV-8762 (for short, 'the offending vehicle'). As a result of the accident, Karandeep Singh suffered multiple injuries. He was taken to Civil Hospital, Batala. From there he was referred to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar but he was taken to Escort Hospital, Amritsar. He succumbed to the injuries. FIR No.9 dated 31.01.2008 was registered at Police Station Batala.

3. A claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') was filed by the parents of the deceased. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. The age of the deceased was proved as 25 years. He was a bachelor. His salary was proved vide Ex.A2 as Rs.9022/- per month. The Tribunal applied multiplier considering the age of the parents and awarded a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum. The amount awarded included a sum of Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses.

4. With able assistance of the counsel, I have perused the paperbook and record.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the Tribunal erred in making deduction of Rs.1500/- per month from salary. He contended that the multiplier should have been applied considering the age of the deceased. His grievance is that no future prospects have been added and the amounts awarded under the conventional heads are on the lower side.

6. Learned counsel for the insurer defended the award.

7. The Tribunal erred in making the deductions from the proved salary of the deceased. From the perusal of the record, it is evident that the deductions were with regard to contribution to GPF etc., the said amount forms part of salary and cannot be deducted. Reliance is placed on decision of Supreme Court in case of Manasvi Jain vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2014(3) SCC 22 wherein it has been held as under :-

“12. This Court in Shyamwati Sharma & Ors. Vs. Karam Singh & Ors., 2010(3) R.C.R. (Civil) 741 : (2010) 12 SCC 378, while considering the issues of deduction of taxes, contributions etc., for arriving at the figure of net monthly income, held that “while ascertaining the income of the deceased, any deductions shown in the salary certificate as deductions towards GPF, life insurance premium, repayments of loans etc., should not be excluded from the income. The deduction towards income tax/surcharge alone should be considered to arrive at the net income of the deceased.”

8. In such circumstances, the compensation would be calculated taking into consideration the monthly salary of the deceased as Rs.9,000/-. He was employed on a fixed salary in Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, as a Clerk-cum-Junior Data Entry Operator. In consonance with the decisions of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors., 2017 AIR (SC) 5157 and Hem Raj vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.19603 of 2017, decided on 22.11.2017, 40% future prospects are to be added.

9. He was a bachelor, hence, one half deduction for self expenses has rightly been made.

10. The issue is that whether the age of the deceased or the age of parents is to be considered for applying the multiplier? Supreme Court in cases of Shri Nagar Mal Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 448 of 2018, decided on 19.01.2018 and Sube Singh and another Vs. Shyam Singh (Dead) and others, Civil Appeal