Compensation for loss of dependency includes emotional and psychological aspects beyond mere financial support.

JUDGMENT :

Archana Puri, J.

1. The appellants-claimants have filed the present appeal thereby questioning the correctness of the amount of compensation, awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, on account of death of Satish, in a motor vehicular accident.

2. Suffice to consider that the accident had taken place on 06.11.2015. On the analysis of the evidence, brought on record, learned Tribunal had concluded about the accident in question, to have taken place, on account of rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration No.PB-23M-8685, driven by respondent No.1-Major Singh and the same caused fatal injuries to Satish. Thereupon, learned Tribunal, while considering the deceased to be 33 years old and employed as Passenger Services Assistant in Air India and also took into consideration testimony of PW-3 Rahul, Assistant Manager, Air India Sats Airport Services Pvt. Ltd., who proved pay slip Ex.P6, the break-up of the salary, as depicted in the pay slip for the month of October 2015 Ex.P6, is as herein given:-

3. However, learned Tribunal considering the break-up aforesaid relating to over-time, holiday wages and night shift allowances had observed that it was not the permanent income of the deceased and while excluding the same, considered the salary of deceased to be Rs.9,050/- per month. Even though, it was asserted in the claim petition that deceased was indulging in agricultural work, but however, considering no satisfactory evidence, coming on record and also considering the recitals of jamabandi Ex.P9, it was concluded that deceased never used to indulge in agricultural work. Thus, the earnings were taken as Rs.9,050/-. Considering the age of the deceased to be 33 years, at the relevant time, on the count of future prospects, addition of 50% was made and the compensation was worked upon as (50% x 1,08,600) + (1,08,600) = Rs.1,62,900/- per annum. Learned Tribunal was not inclined for deduction on account of income tax. However, father of deceased was not held to be dependent upon the income of the deceased. Considering other number of dependents to be four, 1/4th was deducted towards personal and living expenses and the compensation was worked upon as (3/4th x 1,62,900) = Rs.1,22,175/-, upon which, multiplier of '16' was applied and the loss of dependency was assessed as Rs.19,54,800/-.

4. Besides the same, another amount of Rs.25,000/- each was awarded, on the count of 'funeral expenses' as well as 'loss of estate' and the amount of Rs.1 lakh was awarded to claimant No.1, on account of loss of consortium and another Rs.1 lakh was awarded to claimants No.2 and 3, towards loss of love and affection. Thus, in total, the compensation to the extent of Rs.22,04,800/- was awarded. All the respondents were held liable to pay the aforesaid amount of compensation, jointly and severally.

5. Be it noted that, it is only the appellants-claimants, who have filed the present appeal for seeking enhancement of the compensation.

6. From the evidence, brought on record, suffice to the consider that date of birth of Satish, as per matriculation certificate Ex.P10 was 07.09.1982. Thus, he is established to be 33 years old, at the time of accident. On the analysis of the evidence, brought on record, it goes without saying that deceased was employed on the post of 'Passenger Services Assistant in Air India'. The pay slip for the month of October 2005 was proved as Ex.P6 by PW-3 Rahul Kumar, Assistant Manager. The detail break-up of the salary of the deceased has also been given in the earlier portion of the judgment. It is pertinent to mention that learned Tribunal had excluded break