Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116109 Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22538 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Shilpy Yadav Respondent :- Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Mohan Rai Counsel for Respondent :- Hridaya Narayan Mishra Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard Shri Krishna Mohan Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri H.N. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the record. 2. The Claim Petition No.62 of 2018 was filed by the petitioner claiming compensation for the death of her husband, who died in a road accident on 27.1.2018 involving roadways bus being No.UP 14/DT-7957 of UPSRTC - sole respondent. The said claim petition was allowed by judgment and award dated 7.12.2019 awarding a sum of Rs.5,38,600/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of settling the issue in the claim petition along with other consequential benefits. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed the income of deceased to be Rs.3,000/- per month and has also granted 40% of the enhancement for future prospects. 3. Aggrieved with the quantum of compensation, the petitioner preferred an appeal before this Court for enhancement of compensation which was partly allowed by this Court by judgment and order dated 23.11.2022. This Court assessed the income of deceased to be Rs.6,000/- per month instead of Rs.3,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Apart from the other modifications in the award by this Court, the only controversy is regarding grant of future prospects. After the judgment and order passed by the Appellate Court, petitioner moved an application before the Tribunal for recalculation of the amount and has prayed that since the income of the deceased has been enhanced by the Appellate Court from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.6,000/- p.m., consequently, the future prospects which have been awarded 40% by the Tribunal should also be enhanced. This prayer of the petitioner has been rejected by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, hence, the present writ petition. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once 40% future prospects have been granted by the Tribunal, there was no occasion for the Tribunal to have rejected the application for recalculation of the future prospects once the income of the deceased has been enhanced by this Court in appeal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submitted that since there is no order by the Appellate Court for grant of future prospects, the Tribunal has rightly passed the order. 6. There is no factual controversy involved in the present writ petition, therefore, I am not calling for the counter affidavit in the present writ petition and the writ petition is being decided at the admission stage itself finally. 7. Once the future prospects are awarded by the Tribunal itself and the same has not been modified by the Appellate Court, then there was no occasion for the Tribunal to refuse to recalculate the future prospects after enhancement of income by the Appellate Court. In my view, the order passed by the Tribunal is wholly misconceived and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the order dated 13.2.2025 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Firozabad is hereby set aside. 8. In view of the same, the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is directed to recalculate the future prospects in accordance with the income of deceased, as has been enhanced by the Appellate Court, while allowing the appeal and shall also pass an order for payment of interest for the period for which the future prospects has not been paid to the petitioner, within two weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with an application for calculation of the amount. 9. The writ petition is allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad