JUDGMENT

Nidhi Gupta, J.

Present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.14,70,000/- granted by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Tribunal") vide Award dated 09.08.2018 passed in Claim Petition No.88 of 2017 filed under section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Four claimants are the widow, minor son and parents of deceased-Bijender Singh @ Bijender.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced before it concluded that the deceased-Bijender Singh @ Bijender had died due to injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 19.05.2017 at 11:40 am due to rash and negligent driving of Alto 800 LXI car bearing registration No.HR-16P-5277 (hereinafter referred to as 'the offending vehicle'), being driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by respondent No.3. Learned Tribunal awarded compensation as above along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till realisation.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks enhancement of compensation on the grounds:

a) that learned Tribunal has taken age of the deceased as 44 years on the basis of his Aadhaar card (Exhibit P14). It is submitted that in actual fact, age of the deceased was 40 years at the time of death as evident from his School Leaving Certificate (Exhibit P11) wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 07.01.1977. It is submitted that accordingly, learned Tribunal ought to have added future prospects @ 40% and not @ 25% as incorrectly done. It is submitted that therefore, multiplier too, should have been 16 and not 14 as incorrectly applied by the Tribunal;

b) that learned Tribunal has assessed income of the deceased as only Rs.10,000/- per month. It is submitted that the deceased was doing agricultural work as also dairy farming and was earning more than Rs.25,000/- per month from both the said pursuits. It is submitted that in support of their contention, the appellants had placed on record copy of jamabandi (Exhibit PA) for the year 2016-17 showing that the deceased owned half share in 48 kanals of land. It is submitted that accordingly, income of the deceased should have been assessed as at least Rs.20,000/- per month. It is further stated that the deceased was having loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/- which was also being repaid by him in instalments and therefore, it is clear that income of the deceased was more than Rs.10,000/- per month;

c) that a deduction of 1/3rd has been made towards personal expenses whereas keeping in view the fact that the claimants are four in number, learned Tribunal ought to have made a deduction of 1/4th towards personal expense.

4. In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company:

a) that it is the claimants' own case as pleaded in the claim petition that the deceased was 44 years of age at the time of death, therefore, future prospects have been correctly added @ 25%, and multiplier of 14 has also been correctly applied;

b) that while computing compensation under the Act, income from agriculture and dairy farming is not to be included;

c) that as per the relevant Minimum Wage Notification, income of the deceased ought to have been taken as Rs.7,600/- per month as admissible to an unskilled labourer. However, learned Tribunal has taken it on higher side as Rs.10,000/- per month.

5. No other argument is raised on behalf of the parties.

6. I have heard learned counse