Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82840 Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1005 of 2011 Appellant :- Smt. Priyanka Devi And Others Respondent :- National Insurance Co. Ltd. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Avinash Jaiswal,Gaurav Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Krishna Shanker Chaudhary Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the claimants/appellants for enhancement of compensation. 3. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants has contended that the accident had taken place on 27.10.2009 and at the time of accident, the deceased was carpenter and he used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month, and it is common knowledge that in the year 2009, the income of a carpenter was not less than Rs.150/- per day and thus, Tribunal should have taken the income of the deceased to be Rs.4500/- per month in place of Rs.2500/- for computing the compensation. It is contended that there were five dependents upon the deceased, therefore, considering the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others 2009 (6) SCC 121, Tribunal should have deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/3rd. 4. It is further submitted that no amount towards future prospect has been awarded by the Tribunal whereas considering the age of the deceased, the claimants/appellants are entitled to 40% towards future prospect in view of the judgement of Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others 2017 (16) SCC 680. 5. Lastly, it is submitted that a very meagre amount of Rs.7,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal towards non-pecuniary damages whereas claimants/appellants are entitled to Rs.70,000/- towards the aforesaid head in view of the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper as there was no proof of income of the deceased and hence, the same does not call for interference by this Court in the appeal. Thus, the submission is that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the instant case is just and proper and based on proper appreciation of facts. 7. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the record. 8. The submission of learned counsel for the claimants/appellants in respect of assessment of income of the deceased has substance. Accordingly, it is provided that Tribunal should have taken the income of the deceased to be Rs.4500/- per month instead of Rs.2500/- for the purpose of computation of compensation. Accordingly, it is provided that compensation shall be computed treating the income of the deceased to be Rs. 4500/- per month i.e. Rs.54,000/- per annum. 9. The submission of learned counsel for the claimants/appellants in respect of future prospect and grant of non-pecuniary expenses has got force in view of the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) and thus, following the aforesaid judgement of Apex Court, the claimants/appellants are entitled to 40% towards future prospect considering the age of the deceased, and further non-pecuniary damages awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.7,000/- to Rs.70,000/-. 10. So far as the submission of learned counsel for the claimants/appellants with regard to deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased in view of the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra) is concerned, the same has got substance. Thus, it is provided that 1/4th should be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/3rd from the income of the deceased for the purpose of computation of compensation. 11. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry same rate of interest as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of institution of claim petition till its payment. 12. For the reasons given above, the appeal is partly allowed and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as indicated above. The insurance company is directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation to the claimants/appellants within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. There shall be no order as to cost. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Mohit Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad