(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the legal representatives of the deceased ? Ramesh against the judgment and order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 05.09.06 passed in Suit No.259/2004 awarding a total compensation of ' 2,61,200/- with interest thereon in favour of the appellants.
(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that on 07.11.2004, the said Ramesh received grievous injuries in a road accident leading to his demise on the spot. THE legal representatives of the deceased viz., the mother and the sister of the deceased filed a claim petition claiming compensation for the untimely demise of their bread earner against the driver, the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle. THE learned Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, awarded a total sum of 2,61,200/- in favour of the claimants along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the suit till the date of the realization of the award amount.
(3.) IT is evident from the award that the learned Tribunal, for the purpose of computing the loss of dependency of the appellants, resorted to the minimum wage rate applicable to an unskilled workman as on the date of the accident, which was in the sum of ' 2,894.90/- per month (rounded off to ' 2, 900/- per month). The learned Tribunal, relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'BijoyKumar Dugar versus Bidhya Dhar Dutta and Others 2006(1) TAC 969 (SC), however, denied to the claimants the benefit of future prospects of increase in the income of the deceased. The said finding, to my mind cannot be upheld in view of the fact that the loss of dependency in the present case has been assessed on the basis of minimum wage rate applicable on the date of the accident. In the case of 'Bali Singh and Others versus Ram Kumar Paswan and Others' MAC. APP. No. 523/2007 decided on July 19, 2011, while dealing with a similar fact-situation it was held by me as under: