Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90590 Court No. - 2 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 236 of 2011 Appellant :- Smt. Gaina Devi Respondent :- The New India Assurance Company Ltd. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Neerja Singh,Sharve Singh Counsel for Respondent :- N.K. Srivastava Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant/appellant for enhancement of award 21.10.2020 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.16, Allahabad in MA.C.P. No. 515 of 1998. 3. Challenging the award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the deceased was employed in Jal Nigam and was drawing the salary of Rs.3,754/- per month at the time of accident. It is contended that the Tribunal has erred in law in deducting the amount which was being deducted from the salary of the deceased towards G.P.F. and Dearness Allowance (D.A.). It is contended that the compensation should have been computed by taking the entire salary of the deceased i.e. Rs.3,754/- per month, and therefore, the Tribunal has erred in law in holding the income of the deceased to be Rs.3,169/-per month. 4. It is further submitted that no amount towards future prospect has been awarded by the Tribunal, whereas considering the age of the deceased i.e. 43 years at the time of accident, the claimant/appellant is entitled to 30% 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. It is contended that there were six 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 1/4 towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/3. It is lastly submitted that the Tribunal has erred in law in fastening the liability of interest upon the owner. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper hence, the same does not call for interference by this Court in the appeal. 6. Be that as it may, the salary of the deceased was Rs.3,754/- per month at the time of accident which was proved on record, therefore, the Tribunal has erred in law in deducting the amount of G.P.F. and Dearness Allowance (D.A.) from the income from the income of the deceased for the purpose of computing the compensation. Accordingly, it is held that the compensation shall be computed by taking the income of the deceased to be Rs.3,754/- per month in place of Rs.3,169/- per month. 7. The submission of learned counsel for the claimants/appellants in respect of future prospect 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, this Court holds that the claimant/appellant is entitled to 30% towards future prospect considering the age of the deceased. 8. 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) has got substance. Thus, it is held that 1/4th should be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1/3rd from the income of the deceased for computation of compensation. 9. This Court also finds that the Tribunal has erred in law in fixing the liability of interest upon the owner, inasmuch as once the Tribunal has found the Insurance Company liable to pay compensation, the liability of interest cannot be fastened upon the owner. Accordingly, it is held that the interest on the entire awarded amount @ 6% simple interest from the date of institution of claim petition till the date of payment shall be paid by the Insurance Company. 10. The enhanced amount of award shall carry 6% simple interest from the date of the institution of claim petition till the date of its payment. 11. For the reasons given above, the appeal is partly allowed and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent as indicated above. 12. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation to the claimant/appellant 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 :- 27.5.2025 NS Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad