In motor accident claims for death, the tribunal must fix a just and reasonable notional income by considering the deceased's age and potential, subsequently applying standard deductions and additions for future prospects to ensure the compensation fulfills the mandate of 'just compensation'.

JUDGMENT

Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation granted in Award dated 22.12.2021 passed in M.C.O.P.No.535 of 2020 on the file of Special District Court (to deal with M.C.O.P. cases), Kirshnagiri, dependents of the deceased Ajith, have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of compensation.

2. Parties are indicated herein as per their litigative status and ranking before the Tribunal.

3. Claim petition was filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the dependents of the deceased Ajith, claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the death of Ajith, in a road traffic accident that occurred on 04.12.2019.

4. At trial, to substantiate the claim, on the claimant side, two witnesses have been examined and seventeen documents have been marked. On the side of the 4^th respondent/Insurance Company, owner-

cum-driver of the lorry has been examined as RW1(Tr.Prakash).

5. The Tribunal upon consideration of entire oral and documentary evidence and after hearing the arguments advanced by either side, granted compensation of Rs.14,90,800/- with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of claim petition. The amounts awarded under various heads are given hereunder:-

Towards Loss of Dependency - Rs.13,60,800/-; Towards loss of Estate and for Funeral Expenses – Rs.15,000/- under each head; Towards loss of consortium – Rs.1,00,000/- in toto Rs.14,90,800/- was granted.

6. The learned Counsel for the appellants / claimants would strenuously argue that deceased was working as a lorry cleaner and earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m., but the Tribunal has assumed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- p.m., is less and sought for enhancement of compensation.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent/Insurance Company would vehemently contend that taking note of the age, avocation, income of the deceased and the other attending circumstances the notional income of the deceased taken by the Tribunal is quite reasonable and according to him it does not warrant any interference by this Court.

8. The manner in which the accident took place is not in dispute. It has come on record through the evidence of PW1 that the deceased was working as lorry cleaner and earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- p.m., at the relevant point of time. To substantiate the income details of the deceased, copy of Course completion Certificate in Diploma in Electronics and Communications Engineering (ECE) issued by Government Polytechnic, Krishnagiri is marked as Ex.P13. Ex.P21 is the copy of the application for the selection by Indian Army Services. These two documents will not help the claimants in fixing the notional income of the deceased. However, this Court deems fit to fix the notion income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- p.m.. As regards the age of the deceased, as per copy of the post-mortem certificate Ex.P2, age of the deceased is taken as 22 years.

9. As held in National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in 2017 (2) TN MAC 609(SC), standard addition is required to be added with the notional income of the deceased as future prospects while computing the loss of dependency as 40%. Claimants are parents and brother of the deceased.

10. As held in Smt.Sarla Verma and Ors., v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC), 1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. The relevant multiplier to be selected is 18m. Based on the aforestated details, for computing loss of dependency, following formula emerges :-

Rs.12,000/- + 40% - 1/3 X 12 X 18m = Rs.24,19,200/-.

11. Towards loss of consortium Rs.20,000/- is granted in addition