Assessment of compensation must consider accurate income details and future prospects, ensuring fair compensation to the claimants.

1. This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the claimants under S.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1988'), questioning the legality and propriety of the award dated 14.5.2014 passed by the 2nd Additional Member to the court of the 1st Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) (for short 'the Claims Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 66 of 2013, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal while allowing the claim in part awarded total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,03,475 with interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization while fastening the liability upon the insurance company. The parties to this appeal shall be referred hereinafter as per their description in the Claims Tribunal.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 26.12.2012 at about 9 p.m., deceased Rajendra Kumar Nag after completing his official work was returning along with Mohan Chand Hathgen (non - applicant No. 1) from Mungeli to Bilaspur while sitting in his offending vehicle, i.e., Alto car bearing registration No. CG 07-2606, which was insured with the non - applicant No. 2 - New India Assurance Co. Ltd. At the relevant time, it was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by said Mohan Chand Hathgen and when they reached near Sardar Rice Mill, it vehemently dashed the tractor parked over there, as a result of which deceased Rajendra Kumar Nag received serious injuries on his head and expired on 27.12.2012 during the course of his treatment in Apollo Hospital, Bilaspur (C.G.).

3. On account of the aforesaid accident, the claimants being legal representatives, who are the wife and children of the deceased, instituted a claim petition enumerated under S.166 of the Act of 1988, alleging inter alia that the deceased, 46 years old, was working as a Branch Manager in R.B.D., State Bank of India, Branch Mungeli, where he used to earn Rs. 51,795 per month and thus total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,41,60,366 has been claimed under various heads.

4. The aforesaid claim has been contested by the non - applicants and the Claims Tribunal after considering the evidence led by the claimants arrived at a conclusion that the alleged accident occurred on 26.12.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, resulting into the sad demise of said Rajendra Kumar Nag. It held further that the vehicle in question was not being used in violation of the insurance policy, as alleged by the insurer and that by considering the annual income of the deceased to the tune of Rs. 4,00,000 by placing its reliance upon the salary details (Exh. A10) of the deceased, awarded total amount of compensation as mentioned hereinabove.

5. Being aggrieved, the claimants have preferred this appeal. Mrs. Indira Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the appellants - claimants, submits that the amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal by disbelieving the certificate (Exh. A9) pertaining to the salary details of the deceased, which was submitted by the Chief Manager of the concerned bank showing the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 51,795, is apparently contrary to law. While inviting attention to Fitment Sheet (Exh. A13) of the deceased based upon which the said salary details of the deceased were prepared, she submitted that the basic salary of the deceased payable to him w.e.f. 1.1.2012 was shown to be Rs. 26,500, however, by ignoring the same, the Tribunal has erred in holding the annual income of the deceased as Rs. 4,00,000 only and thereby failed to provide just and proper compensation payable to the claimants.

6. On the