1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No.172 of 2012 ------ 1. Smt. Kusum Devi wife of Late Manoj Ram 2. Rajan Kumar son of Late Manoj Ram 3. Niranjan Kumar son of Late Manoj Ram 4. Riti Roshan Kumar son of Late Manoj Ram 5. Ghanshyam Ram son of Late Jagdish Ram Appellant nos. 2 -4 are presently minor as such they are being represented through their mother and natural guardian Smt. Kusum Devi i.e. the appellant no.1 herein, all residing at Village Barsaut, P.O. Barsaut, P.S. Barhi, District Hazaribagh .... .... …. Appellants Versus 1. Chandradeo Pandit son of Sri Nanu Lal Kumhar @ Nunulal Pandit (owner of Jeep Taxi No.JH 02E 3334), resident of Village Birajpur, P.O. Palounjia, P.S. Birni, District Giridih 2. The New India Assurance Company Limited (Insurer of Mahindra & Mahindra Jeep Taxi No.JH 02E 3334), through Branch Manager, Ranchi Branch No.2, Atma Ram Bhawan, Radhey Shyam Lane, Main Road, P.S. Kotwali, Ranchi 834001 also represented through office of the Company, The New India Assurance Company Limited through the Branch Manager, Giridih Branch, P.O., P.S. & District Giridih .... .... .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Appellants : Mr. Arvind Kumar Lall, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate ------ Order No.10 / Dated : 10.02.2025 Claimants are in appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded in M.V. Claim Case No.36 of 2005 whereby and whereunder Rs.4,17,500/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of framing of issue till the date of its payment, was allowed in favour of the claimants. 2. It is argued by the learned counsel on behalf of appellants that the claim is not in accord with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and the compensation needs upward revision under the head of future prospect, conventional heads and the living expenses 1/4 should be taken, whereas the deceased left behind five dependents. 3. Learned counsel on behalf of Insurance Company has defended the impugned order. 2 4. Having considered the submissions advanced of both sides, the appeal for enhancement of compensation merits consideration. Taking Rs.3000/- as monthly income, 32 years as the age of the deceased at the time of death with 1/4th as the living expense, the final compensation amount work out as under: - Annual Income Rs.3000/-x12 Rs.36000/- Annual dependency after deducting 1/4 on the living and personal expenses of the deceased Rs.27000/- Loss of dependency on taking a multiplier of 16 Rs.27000/- x 16 = Rs. 4,32,000/- Future Prospect @ 40% Rs. 6,04,800 Conventional head Rs. 70,000/- Total Rs. 6,74,800/- 5. Insurance Company is accordingly directed to pay total compensation of Rs 6,74,800/- with interest @ 6% from the date of filing of claim application within a month of this order. The Tribunal shall disburse the compensation amount to the claimants on terms as fixed by it. Miscellaneous appeal is allowed accordingly. Interlocutory Application if any, is disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit