PADMARAJ Vs. NAGAMMA, MAJOR, W/O M. PUTTASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants submits that though the deceased was 25 years, earning Rs. 25,000/ -per month, the Tribunal has fixed the income at Rs. 6,000/ - per month and after deducting 50% of the income towards personal expenses, fixed loss of dependency at Rs. 3000/ - per month and awarded meagre compensation. He prays for enhancement of compensation. Perused the LCR.

(2.) IT is the case of the claimants who are the parents of the deceased Muniraju that Muniraju died in a motor accident that occurred on 31.10.2004. The claimants have not proved the income of the deceased. The Tribunal has fixed the income of the deceased at Rs. 6000/ - per month. Since he was a bachelor, the Tribunal has deducted 50% of the income towards personal expenses of the deceased The deceased was a resident of Mandya city. Keeping view that Ex. P.7 licence to run a shop and Ex. P.8 being a professional tax receipt, the income of the deceased can be safely fixed at Rs. 6,000/ -. There is no satisfactory evidence to show that the deceased was earning Rs. 25,000/ - per month. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in fixing the income of the deceased at Rs. 6000/ - per month. Though the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarala Varma case was rendered in 2009 and the impugned judgment was made in 2007, it would meet the ends of justice to apply the ratio in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, AIR 2009 SC 3104 and apply multiplier 14 instead of 13. Taking into consideration the age of the mother of the deceased who is 45 years, in our view, the claimants are entitled for compensation as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2364_TLKAR0_2012.html</FRM>

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount along with costs and interest with the Tribunal within 3 months from today.