Assessment of compensation must consider all reliable income evidence, and tribunals should not dismiss documented proofs due to inadequate accompanying documents.

JUDGMENT :

Mrs. Alka Sarin, J.

CM-24903-CII-2017

This is an application for condonation of delay of 35 days in filing the appeal.

For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 35 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed off.

FAO-7514-2017

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) vide the impugned award dated 17.04.2017 in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 09.12.2015.

2. Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts are not being adverted to for the sake of brevity.

3. The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following compensation :

4. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that the income of the deceased has wrongly been assessed as Rs. 10,000/- per month inasmuch as the claimant-appellants in the present case had produced on record the Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 (Ex.P4 to Ex.P6) and the last Income Tax Return for the Assessment Year 2014-15 reveals that the income of the deceased minus income tax was Rs. 2,16,848/- per annum (Rs. 2,18,720 – Rs. 1,872 tax). It is further the contention of the learned counsel that though the deduction as 1/4th and the multiplier of ‘14’ have rightly been applied, however, no amount has been awarded towards future prospects. It is further the contention of the learned counsel that the amounts awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the head ‘loss of consortium’ are not as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., [(2017) 16 SCC 680], Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors., [(2018) 18 SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd., [2021(4) RCR (Civil) 642].

5. Per contra the learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company would contend that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 10,000/- per month as no supporting documents were produced on the record except for the Income Tax Returns. It is further the contention of the learned counsel that no documents pertaining to the business were produced on the record and, hence, the Income Tax Returns have rightly not been considered by the Tribunal while assessing the income. It is further the contention of the learned counsel that sufficient amount has already been awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any enhancement.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

7. In the present case the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 10,000/- per month. The claimant-appellants, in order to prove the income of the deceased, had produced on record his Income Tax Returns (Ex.P4 to Ex.P6) and in this regard also examined Ajay Kumar, Tax Assistant as PW3. The only ground for not considering the Income Tax Returns was that there were no accompanying documents. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Indiro Devi & Ors., [2018 (3)