Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:63554 Court No. - 48 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2524 of 2004 Appellant :- Smt. Sneh Lata And Others Respondent :- National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Divl. Manager And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Sharve Singh,A.L. Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- Amit Manohar Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J. Heard Sri Sharve Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Amit Manohar, learned counsel for respondent no. 1/National Insurance Co. Ltd. and perused the record. No one is present on behalf of respondent no. 2, who is owner of the vehicle. This first appeal from order has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 on behalf of claimants-appellants for enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 25.05.2004, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal /Additional District Judge, Court No. 12, Allahabd, in M.A.C.P. No. 491 of 2001 (Smt. Sneh Lata and others vs. Kulwant Singh and another) by which compensation of Rs. 1,87,000/- along with 8% interest has been awarded to the claimants-respondents on account of death of Ashwani Jaiswal, who died in a road accident on 08.06.2001. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the compensation awarded by the claims tribunal is in lower side. The deceased aged about 30 years was Homeopathic Doctor and had earned Rs. 10,000/- per month and the claims tribunal has erred in disbelieving the income of the deceased and had calculated the compensation accepting Rs. 15,000/- per annum as notional income. It is further submitted that nothing has been awarded towards future prospects and only Rs. 7,000/- was awarded for non pecuniary damages, whereas, the claimants-appellants are entitled for 40% future prospects and Rs. 70,000/- for non pecuniary damages in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (4) T.A.C. 673. Lastly, it is submitted that there are four dependents on the income of the deceased and the claims tribunal has also erred in deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, whereas as, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma vs. D.T.C., reported in 2009 (2) T.A.C. 677 (S.C.) has provided deduction of 1/4th, if the member of dependents are 4 to 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance Company submits that the compensation awarded by the claims tribunal is almost just and proper and no ground for enhancement is made out. It is further submitted that claimants had failed to prove the income of the deceased as such, the claims tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 15,000/- per annum as provided in the second schedule of Motor Vehicle Act. It is submitted that the age of the deceased was 30 years and the claims tribunal has erred in applying multiplier of 18, whereas, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma (supra) has provided multiplier of 17 for the age group of 26 to 30 years. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The claims tribunal while deciding issue no. 4 has recorded the finding that the claimants had failed to produce any documentary evidence in respect of income of the deceased. The accident was occurred in the year 2001 and as such, the income of the deceased is assessed as Rs. 3,000/- per month as provided by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Laxmi Devi & Others vs Mohammad Tabbar & Another reported in 2008 (2) T.A.C. 394 (S.C.) for the accident of year 2004. The claims tribunal has also erred in applying the multiplier of 18 and as per law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma (supra), the appropriate multiplier would be 17. The claimants appellants are also entitled for 40% future prospects and Rs. 70,000/- for non pecuniary damages as per law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Pranai Sethi (Supra). The claims tribunal has also erred in deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased ignoring the fact that there are four dependents on the income of the deceased and as per law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma (supra), the deduction would be 1/4th. In view of above discussion the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is reassessed as follows :- 1. Monthly Income : Rs. 3,000/- 2. Annual Income : Rs. 3,000//- x 12 = Rs. 36,000/- 3. Future prospects : (40%) = Rs. 14,400/- 4. Total annual income : Rs. 36,000/- + Rs. 14,400/- = Rs. 50,400/- 5. Deduction towards personal expenses (1/4) : Rs. 50,400/- - Rs. 12,600/- = Rs. 37,800/- 6. Multiplier applicable (17) : Rs. 37,800/- x 17 = Rs. 6,42,600/- 7. Non-pecuniary damages : Rs. 70,000/- Total : Rs. 6,42,600/- + Rs. 70,000/- = Rs. 7,12,600/- The first appeal from order is hereby partly allowed and award of the Claims Tribunal is modified and compensation is enhanced from Rs. 1,87,000/- to Rs. 7,12,600/-. The claimants-appellants are also entitled for interest at the rate of 6% on the enhanced amount from the date of award of the claims tribunal i.e. 25.05.2004. The respondent Insurance Company is directed to pay enhanced amount along with interest to the claimants-appellants within two months from today. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 sailesh Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad