The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of quantum of compensation, including the income of the deceased, future prospects, non-pecuniary damages, and the rate of interest, based on established legal principles.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Vishnu Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Brijesh Chandra Naik, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 29.1.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P No.306 of 1999 (Suman Singh and others vs. Mahaveer Tarachand Bafana and others) awarding a sum of Rs.6,86,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute. The respondent has not challenged the liability imposed on them. The only issue to be decided is, the quantum of compensation awarded.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that an accident took place on 13.9.1999 wherein Sanjai Singh, who was self employed person earning Rs.3,86,495/-per annum, met with accidental death leaving behind him his widow wife of 22 years, daughter of one and half years and parents aged about 55 and 50 years. The Tribunal has considered his income to be Rs.5,000/-per month did not add any amount towards future loss of income granted multiplier of 17 and granted only Rs.6,000/- towards non pecuniary damages. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has not granted any amount towards future loss of income of the deceased which should be 40% of the income in view of the decision in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680. It is further submitted that the multiplier of 17 awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and it should be 18 in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121. It is also submitted that the amount for non-pecuniary damages and the interest awarded by the Tribunal are on the lower side and require enhancement. The deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased should be 1/3rd as the deceased died leaving behind him his widow, minor daughter and parents. Leaned counsel for the appellant has also relied on the decision in Vimal Kanwar and Others Vs. Kishore Dan and others, 2013 (3) T.A.C. 6 (S.C.).

5. As against this, Sri Brijesh Chandra Naik, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the income of the deceased does not require any enhancement as the income which has not been proved cannot be granted. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any interference.

6. Having heard the counsels for the parties and considered the factual data, this Court finds that the accident occurred on 13.9.1999 causing death of Sanjai Singh who was 24 years of age at the time of accident. The Tribunal has considered the income tax return which was for Rs.61,000/- and therefore, certain additions can be made to his income. We consider his income Rs.8,000/-per month but are unable to accept the submission of counsel for the appellant that his income should be considered to be Rs.3,86,495/- as the deceased was self employed person. We are even supported in our view by the decision of the Apex Court in Vimla Devi and others Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and another, (2019) 2 SCC 186.

7. As far as addition of future prospects is concerned, the deceased being below 40 years of age, 40% of the income will have to be added in view of the decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680. The multiplier applicable would be 18 and Rs.1,00,000/- requires to be granted under the head of non-pecuniary damages. As far as deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased is concerned, it would be 1/3rd as the deceased was survived by his widow, one daughter and parents.

8. Henc