Determination of compensation in motor accident claims requires assessment of the deceased's income based on social status and dependency of legal heirs.

JUDGMENT :

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 11.04.2023 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nuh (for brevity “the Tribunal”), whereby an amount of Rs. 20,44,400/- was awarded as compensation to the appellant/claimant along with interest @ 6% per annum.

Brief Facts

2. A claim petition came to be filed before the Ld. Tribunal, praying for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only) along with the interest @ 24% per annum on account of death of Pawan in a vehicular accident which took place on 16.03.2018 while alleging rash and negligent driving of respondent No.5-driver.

3. Learned Tribunal after appraisal of evidence and record held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.5/ driver and after assessing income of deceased @ Rs.8,000/- per month being an able-bodied person and making deducting of 1/4th towards personal expenses, awarded compensation in the following manner:-

Further, liability was jointly and severely fastened upon the driver; the owner and the Insurance Company and the compensation amount was ordered to be disbursed in the following manner:-

4. Being aggrieved against the award dated 11.04.2023, the present appeal was preferred by the appellant for setting aside the compensation awarded to respondent Nos.1 to 4 and for release of entire compensation in her favour as well as for enhancement. Facts as specified in the claim petition about the manner of accident and the issue regarding negligence of the driver been recorded in favour of claimants by the Ld. Tribunal, are not being repeated here for the sake of brevity.

Arguments

5. Learned counsel for the appellant assailed the award while submitting that earning of the deceased, was to the tune of Rs.30,000/- per month as he was running a shop in the village. It was further submitted that the above fact was duly proved from the deposition of the appellant as well as the mother of the deceased which was not rebutted by the respondent Nos.5 to 7 by leading any evidence and therefore, Ld. Tribunal went wrong while having assessed monthly income @ Rs.8000/- per month. Furthermore, it was submitted that deduction @ 1/4th towards self expenditure by the deceased was on the higher side besides funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium also been assessed on the lower side. Ld. Counsel also submitted that respondent Nos.2 and 3 being above 35 years of age and residing peacefully with their respective families; earning handsome income from their occupation besides respondent No.4-sister of the deceased, been married and living with her family; they being not dependent on the deceased were thus not entitled for any compensation.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel representing respondent No.7-Insurance Company submitted that there was no basis to assess the income of the deceased as Rs.30,000/- per month as no evidence except the bare testimonies of the PW-1, namely, Kamla and RW-1, namely, Manita were available before the Tribunal in support. He thus submitted that the Tribunal, therefore, rightly assessed the income of the deceased. He further pointed out that Ld. Tribunal rightly deducted 1/4th as personal expenses. Learned counsel further submitted that in facts and circumstances of the case, appellant and claimants were rightly compensated and, thus the present appeal was liable to be dismissed.

7. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that the respondents being mother, brothers and sister of the deceased were dependent upon him and, therefore, Ld. Tribun