Court recalculated compensation based on estimated earnings of deceased, allowing appeal for enhanced damages.

1. The present is a claimants' appeal under S.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 10th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur, vide its award dated 21.7.2010 passed in Claim Case No. 66 of 2009.

2. Vide the impugned award dated 21.7.2010, the Tribunal, in a proceeding under S.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, in a death case, has awarded a compensation of Rs. 2,67,000 to the appellants - claimants, with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim application.

3. The undisputed facts of the case are that:
(i) The deceased Surendra Singh Chawla died in a vehicular accident occurred on 9.8.2007 by bus No. CG 04 - G 3399.
(ii) Respondent No. 1 was the driver, respondent No. 2 was the owner, respondent No. 3 was the controller / manager and respondent No. 4 was the insurer of the offending bus.
(iii) Appellant No. 1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are the dependants of the deceased Surendra Singh Chawla.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants - claimants submits that the Tribunal while quantifying the compensation has not properly taken into consideration the income tax return submitted. He further submits that the Tribunal has erred in not appreciating the fact that the deceased was an income tax payee and for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, the income of the deceased has increased manifold and his income has been shown at more than Rs. 25,00,000 for the assessment year 2007-08 and more than Rs. 50,00,000 for the assessment year 2008-09. He thus prayed for the compensation amount to be suitably enhanced. That the deceased was in the business of transport and was making good money.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 4 insurance company on the other hand referred to the finding of the Tribunal where it had doubted the income tax return submitted. He further submits that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 30,000. He accordingly prayed for the rejection of the appeal.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the evidence on record, even if we doubt the income tax return for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, the income tax return for the assessment year 2006-07 shows the income of the deceased to be about Rs. 7,88,000. If assuming this also to be at a higher side or an inflated return submitted by the deceased for business purpose, this court is of the opinion that taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was a businessman and that the accident being of the year 2007, the minimum income which the deceased would have earned in a month would not be less than Rs. 7,000 which makes the yearly income to be Rs. 84,000.

7. It is thus ordered that for the purpose of quantifying compensation, this court assesses the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000 and yearly at Rs. 84,000, instead of Rs. 30,000 as was assessed by the Tribunal.

8. If 30 per cent of Rs. 84,000, i.e., Rs. 25,200, is added towards the future prospects, it would come to Rs. 1,09,200, of which if 1/3rd, i.e., Rs. 36,400, is deducted towards personal expenses, the amount would become Rs. 72,800 which if further multiplied by multiplier of 13, the total amount would become Rs. 9,46,400.

9. It is accordingly ordered that the claimants shall be entitled for an amount of Rs. 9,46,400 towards loss of dependency, instead of Rs. 2,60,000 as has been awarded by the Tribunal.

10. Considering the fact that accident is of the year 2007, this court is of the opinion that a lump sum compensation of Rs. 55,000, instead of Rs. 7,000