Compensation for wrongful death must factor in age, occupation, and income, adhering to established legal principles for award enhancement.

JUDGMENT

The appellants have filed this appeal to allow the appeal and enhance the award dated 02.01.2024 in MCOP No.470 of 2023on the file of Special District Judge, MCOP Tribunal, Salem.

2. The brief facts of the case of the appellants/claimants are as follows:

On 24.09.2020 at abut 7.50 p.m when the deceased Sureshkumar was riding a two wheeler bearing Registration No.T.N.52-R-0762 on his extreme left in Salem-Bhavani Road a lorry bearing Registration No.TN- 04-Av5350 came behind the two wheeler and dashed against the said Suresh kumar. As a result of which the deceased sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Hence, the legal heirs of the deceased has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/-.

3. Upon considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.10,05,000/- as compensation, directed the first and second respondents to pay the said amount to the appellant along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.

4. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants (claimants) have filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 .

5. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has not considered the age, occupation and income of the deceased and awarded the compensation. At the time of the accident the deceased was working as a appraiser in a Bank and earning a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has taken only a sum of Rs.10,000/- as monthly income for awarding compensation under the head Loss of Income. Further the amount awarded under other heads is also very low. Hence prays to enhance the compensation by allowing this petition.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent contended that the award passed by the Tribunal is based on well-settled principles of law applicable at the time of the order, and therefore, it need not be interfered.

7. Heard both sides and perused the materials on record.

8. On an analysis of the award of the Tribunal would go to show that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.8,80,000/- under the head loss of Income; Rs. 60,000/- under the head loss of love and affection; Rs.40,000/- each under the head loss of consortium' Rs. 25,000/- under the head funeral expenses. Thus the total compensation is arrived at Rs.10,05,000/-

9. Considering the occupation of the deceased this Court is of the view that the deceased would be earning Rs.18,000/- per month. As per the decision rendered in the case ofNational Insurance Co. vs Pranay Sethi and others , reported in2017 (2) TNMAC 601 10% is to be added towards future prospects of the deceased. The deceased died, leaving behind the respondents, who are her legal heirs. Considering the age of the deceased 1/3 of the income is to be deducted towards the deceased's personal expenses. The deceased was aged 52 years at the time of the accident, and as per the decision rendered in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another , reported in(2009) 6 SCC

121, the proper multiplier to be adopted in the instance case is 11.

Calculation Monthly Income = Rs.18,000/-

10% Future Prospects = 18,000 + 1,800 = 19,800/- After 1/3 deduction = 19,800 – 6,600 = Rs.13,200/-

Loss of Income = Rs.13,200 x 12 x 11 = Rs.17,42,400/-. With regard to loss of love and affection expenses the same is enhanced to Rs.80,000/-. No amount was awarded under the head Loss of estate, hence Rs.16,500/- was awarded under the said head and with regard to funeral expenses th