The assessment of notional income in motor accident compensation claims must be based on a realistic estimation of the deceased's earning capacity, qualifications, and industry-specific experience, rather than relying on arbitrary or low benchmarks when substantial evidence of higher professional income has been presented.

JUDGMENT :

1. By consent of the parties, the first appeal is taken up for final hearing.

2. This appeal is filed by the original claimant for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai (“Tribunal”) by its order dated 16 August 2014. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10 lakhs alongwith interest at 7.5% per annum. The basis of compensation towards loss of future income is considered by estimating notional income at Rs.8,000/- per month by relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M. K. Gopinathan vs. J. Krishna & Ors., (2015) 11 SCC 235. The age of the deceased was 41 years. The Tribunal has, however, passed “pay and recovery” order against the Insurance Company so that awarded amount can be recovered from vehicle owner.

3. On 26 June 2009, the deceased Mr. Rajesh Deshmukh was travelling in a Motor Jeep from Bhuvaneshwar to Paradeep Port when the said jeep collided with the stationary truck. The deceased sustained serious injuries and thereafter expired. The deceased was a Technical Engineer working as a Maritime Engineer, qualified from Pune University in the year 1991 and had done various courses with regard to the Maritime Industry conducted by the Government of India and others. Voluminous documents are attached in support thereof, which is not disputed.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANTS:-

4. Mr. Kini, learned counsel for the appellants is primarily aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal in considering only Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased. It is his submission that the claimants have led evidence of two persons with whom the deceased had worked with namely, M/s. Samson Maritime Limited and Herald Maritime Services to justify notional income of more than 1.60 lakhs per month. He submitted that after considering the evidence and the background of the deceased, the Tribunal was not justified in considering only Rs.8,000 per month as notional income of the deceased. He submitted that atleast Rs.1,59,932/- being the last drawn salary from M/s. Samson Maritime Limited should be considered for computing the compensation.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY:-

5. Ms. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the insurance company has vehemently objected to the submission made by Mr. Kini. It is her case that the deceased was not in regular employment and the chart annexed with his employment application demonstrates that he was basically working on contract basis for a few months. She submitted that even if this employment of few months is considered, the submission of the claimant that Rs.1.59 lakhs should be considered would be on the higher side. She further submitted that the employment contract relied upon by the applicant from M/s. Samson Maritime Limited was not signed by the deceased and, therefore, such a document cannot be considered for the purpose of notional income. She submitted that the claimants have miserably failed to lead any evidence in support of their submission to claim notional income of Rs.1.59 lakhs per month. She vehemently defended the Tribunal’s order of considering Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income.

6. I have heard Mr. Kini, learned counsel for the appellants, Ms. Bharadi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1-vehicle owner and Ms. Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent no.2-insurance company. Ms. Bharadi has not m