The main legal point established is the application of principles of loss of dependency and future prospects in determining compensation in motor accident cases.

T. VAIPHEI, J.

1. In this appeal, the appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Court No. 2), West Tripura in his award dated 11-12-2012 of T.S. (M.A.C.) No. 198 of 2009 from Rs. 6,49,193/- to Rs. 10,00,000/-.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly noticed at the outset. In the evening of 23-2-2009 at about 6 PM, while the deceased Bapi Das was proceeding from his residence towards Agartala by foot, one motorcycle bearing Registration No. TR-04-5666 coming from backside dashed against him at Chandrapur-Balda Khal Road and waylaid him on the road thereby causing severe injuries on his head and other parts of his body. He was then shifted to G.B. Hospital by the local people, where he was admitted on the same day. He was then referred to S.S.K.M. Hospital, Kolkata where he shifted and admitted therein on 26-2-2009. In course of his treatment, he succumbed to his injuries on 5-3-2009 at the hospital. A police case was registered against the rider of the offending motorcycle over the accident as East Agartala P.S. Case No. 47/09 U/s 279/338/304-A IPC, who was subsequently charge-sheeted by the police.

3. The appellant No. 1 is the mother of the deceased, whereas the appellant No. 2 and 3 are his younger brother and sister. He is stated to have maintained his mother and other family members due to the premature death of his father, who predeceased them. They, therefore, filed the claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura against the owner of the motor cycle and the United India Insurance Company claiming a compensation of Rs. 10,02,000/- for the death of the deceased. The claim petition was contested by both the owner of the motorcycle and the insurer. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties, passed the impugned award directing the payment of compensation to the order of Rs. 6,49,193/- together with interest @ 9% per annum to the appellants. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, this appeal is now preferred by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation payable from Rs. 6,49,193/- to Rs. 10,00,000/- together with interest @ 9% per annum.

4. Assailing the impugned award, Mr. A. Das, the learned counsel for the appellants, contends that the award of Rs. 19,562/- as against the actual expenditures incurred by the deceased for the cost of his medicines is ill-conceived and unrealistic considering the nature of his injuries and the same needs to be revised to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. He also submits that the learned Member has failed to consider the actual air fares incurred for the deceased and his attendants which came to Rs. 57,972/-, which is actual expenditures so incurred and has wrongly awarded only Rs. 49,686/- in this behalf. He further submits that when it has been sufficiently proved that the deceased was an electrician-cumdecorator not only employed by the owner of Joy Ram Electric and Decorators at Old Agartala but also doing other electrical wiring works privately in various houses, he could not have earned only Rs. 4,000/- per month as determined by the Tribunal; considering the present day wages earned by self-employed youths, he could have easily earned not less than Rs. 6,000/- per month. According to the learned counsel, the income of the deceased as determined by the Tribunal is very much on the lower side, and even though the appellants could not show documentary evidence, the Tribunal could have applied its common sense for determining the income of the deceased by taking into account the wages earned by daily laborers these days; even skilled construction workers are now getting not less than Rs. 400/- per day. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that it has escaped the attention of the Tribunal that the appellants have proved that the deceased, though a bachelor, was supporting the appellants, who are his mother and his two school-