HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 3694 of 2010 Court No. - 54 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard Sri S.D. Ojha, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for respondent. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal by judgment and award dated 23.11.2010, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 9/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Meerut, in Motor Accident Claim No. 964 of 2009. 3. The brief facts pleaded in the claim petition are that on 17.07.2009 at about 03:00 P.M., the deceased Bhagwat Singh was going to Haridwar for taking bath in Tempo No. UP-15 AT-2056. When the said Tempo reached about 7 kilometres before Bijnor, the driver of the Tempo, due to rash and negligent driving, overturned the vehicle on the road. In the said accident, Bhagwat Singh, Vikas and Sonu sustained injuries. Bhagwat Singh sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. 4. The learned Tribunal, after considering the evidence available on record, recorded a finding that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Tempo driver. The learned Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum and, applying the provisions of the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, determined the compensation. Accordingly, a total compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- was awarded in favour of the claimants along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Arguments on behalf of the Appellant Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Satya Deo Ojha Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rahul Sahai Smt. Saroj And Others .....Appellant(s) Smt. Natthi And Another .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and does not represent just and reasonable compensation. It was submitted that the income of the deceased has been assessed inadequately at Rs.15,000/- per annum by treating the same as notional income, whereas, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the income of the deceased ought to have been assessed at Rs.3,000/- per month. It was further submitted that appropriate addition towards future prospects ought to have been made while determining the income of the deceased. Learned counsel also submitted that the compensation under the non-pecuniary heads ought to have been awarded in accordance with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 LawSuit (SC) 1093. Arguments on behalf of the Respondent-Insurance Company 6. Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company supported the award passed by the learned Tribunal and submitted that the compensation awarded is just and proper. It was submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum and has correctly determined the compensation in accordance with the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was further submitted that there is no justification for making any further enhancement in the compensation and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. Conclusion 7. On the question of quantum of compensation, having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment and award, I find that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal requires reassessment.The accident took place in the year 2009. The learned Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. In the facts and circumstances of the case, such assessment cannot be considered to be just and reasonable. The income of the deceased ought to have been assessed by treating him as a casual labourer. Accordingly, his monthly income is taken at Rs.3,000/-, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. 8. The deceased was aged about 34 years at the time of the accident and was survived by five dependents, namely, his wife and four minor children. FAFO No. 3694 of 2010 2 In view of the age of the deceased, an addition of 40% towards future prospects is liable to be made. After such addition, the annual income comes to Rs.50,400/-. Since the deceased was survived by five dependents, deduction of one-fourth towards his personal and living expenses would be appropriate. The remaining amount of Rs.37,800/- per annum would constitute the annual contribution towards the maintenance of the dependents. Applying the multiplier of 16, applicable to the age group of 31 to 35 years, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.6,04,800/-. 9. So far as the non-pecuniary heads are concerned, this Court considers it appropriate to award Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi. The said amounts are being taken at the aforesaid figures without making any subsequent 10% enhancement. 10. Accordingly, the compensation is reassessed as under: Sl. No. Particulars Amount 1. Annual income (Rs.3,000 × 12) : Rs.36,000/- 2. Addition towards future prospects @ 40% : Rs.14,400/- 3. Annual income after future prospects : Rs.50,400/- 4. Deduction towards personal expenses @ 1/4 : Rs.12,600/- 5. Annual loss of dependency : Rs.37,800/- 6. Multiplier : 16 7. Loss of dependency : Rs.6,04,800/- 8. Loss of estate : Rs.15,000/- 9. Funeral expenses : Rs.15,000/- 10. Loss of consortium : Rs.40,000/- Total Compensation of Rs. 6,74,800/-/- 11. In view of the above, appellant/ claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.6,74,800/- along with rate of interest at the rate of 6% per annum which shall be indemnified by the insurer of the offending vehicle. 11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. 12. It is further directed that if any amount has already been paid by the FAFO No. 3694 of 2010 3 Insurance Company pursuant to the award of the learned Tribunal, the same shall be adjusted towards the total amount payable under this judgment. The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced amount of compensation before the concerned Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of this order; it shall further be released by the learned Tribunal within four weeks after the deposit of the said amount in favour of the claimants/parents, each of whom shall directly receive 50%-50% in their respective savings bank accounts in cash. (i) The claimants are hereby directed to provide their savings bank account details, having R.T.G.S. facility, within four weeks from today to the learned Tribunal. (ii) The said amount shall be transferred to the savings bank accounts of the claimants by way of passing a judicial order, so that the differential amount may be transferred directly from the account of the Tribunal to the accounts of the claimants, after completing the necessary formalities, if any. September 25, 2026 Mukesh FAFO No. 3694 of 2010 4 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad