Judgment

Mrs. Alka Sarin, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 21.08.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) challenging the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimant-appellants on account of death of Pooja Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’). Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts are not being adverted to for the sake of brevity.

2. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that income of the deceased has been assessed as Rs.15,000/- per month merely on conjectures and surmises ignoring the evidence on the record. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would further contend that the claimant-appellants had produced letter of offer for employment (Ex.P15), employment letter (Ex.P16), letter of performance review (Ex.P-17), confirmation of service (Ex.P18), letter regarding change of name of employer’s company (Ex.P19), appraisal letter (Ex.P20), salary appraisal (Ex.P21), salary slips for the months of June and July, 2016 (Ex.P22 & Ex.P23) and pay slip for the month of March 2014 (Ex.P24). Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants has further contended that all the said evidence has been rejected by the Tribunal only on the ground that income tax returns of the deceased have not been brought on the record and further that the audit report of the company has not been brought on the record. It is further the contention that there was sufficient evidence on the record to show that the salary of the deceased in the month of June 2016 i.e. prior to the date of the accident i.e. 10/11.07.2016 was Rs.38,250/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants while relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. 2021 (4) RCR (Civil) 642 has contended that the amount awarded under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses would have to be increased in consonance with the said judgment. It is further the contention that no amount has been awarded under the head of loss of consortium to the claimant-appellants and being mother and sister of the deceased, they both are entitled to Rs.44,000/- each under the head of loss of filial consortium as per the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130 and N. Jayasree (supra).

3. Per contra learned counsel for respondent No.3 has contended that the deceased, if was earning Rs.39,000/- per month, would be liable to pay income tax and since her income tax returns were not produced, hence the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per month. It is further the contention of learned counsel for respondent No.3 that no amount is payable to the sister under the head of loss of consortium.

4. In the present case the Tribunal has awarded the following compensation :

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. The claimant-appellants herein while leading extensive evidence have produced o