JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 20.02.2007 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.2,98,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, on account of death of Mahabir Singh in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 23.03.2004.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case are not reproduced for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contends that the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and compensation should be enhanced as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company, however, vehemently argues that the award has rightly been passed and the amount of compensation, as assessed by the learned Tribunal has rightly been granted. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

6. A perusal of the award shows that the deceased was 55 years of age at the time of accident and was ex serviceman and was getting pension of Rs.5113/-per month. After his death, his wife is now getting family pension of Rs.3500/-per month. Indisputably, the deceased was an ex serviceman and was getting a pension of Rs.5113/- per month. The claimants proved on record pension payment account as Ex PH. Further perusal of the award shows that the widow of the deceased is getting a pension of Rs.3500/- per month, after the death of her husband. Therefore, this Court while relying upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a case of Santosh and others vs. Mahavir and others, passed in FAO No. 8638-2014, decided on 08.12.2017, deems it fit to take the difference between the pension allowed to the deceased and the family pension payable to the widow, the claimants shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 1613/-per month qua loss of pension. The loss of dependency qua loss of pension comes out to Rs.1613X11X12 - 1/4th (deduction for personal expenses)=Rs.1,59,720/-. The details of the chart is reproduced below:-

7. After retirement, the deceased was working as Accountant and getting Rs.6075/- per month. The salary certificate was duly proved by way of certificate Ex PB. A perusal of the award indicates that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3000/- per month, as the deceased was working as Accountant and was getting Rs.6075/- per month, as per salary certificate Ex PB. However, the learned Tribunal has erred in law in deducting personal expenses of the deceased @ 1/2 instead of 1/4th. The Tribunal has also not awarded any amount for future prospects. Moreover, the amount awarded for funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, the award requires indulgence of this Court.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are as under:-

'30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardised deductions. Having a