(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 17.1.2003. passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Delhi, awarding total sum of Rs. 7,11,010/- as compensation to the appellants for the death of Sh. Dalip Prakash Kerketta who died in an accident on 30.3.98 at 10.30 p.m. The deceased was returning from ITO on his two-wheeler scooter No. DL-1SJ-7526. When he reached at Monkey Bridge, Ring Road within the jurisdiction of P.S. Kotwali at about 10.35 p.m. a Maruti Car No. DL-8CD-1726 came at a very fast speed being driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, hit the scooter of the deceased from behind. The car was owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3. After framing of proper issues and considering material on record, learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that deceased received fatal injuries in the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the car by respondent No. 1. Learned Tribunal further held that from the evidence on record, it is clearly proved that deceased was about 39 years old and was working as Head Clerk in the Office of Food and Supplies, Bunkar Vihar, Sundar Nagri, Delhi. His total monthly salary was Rs. 6628/- and after deducting one-third which the deceased would be spending on himself the dependency of the petitioners on the deceased would be about Rs. 4400/- per month. Applying a multiplier of 14 years, the compensation payable to the appellants was computed at Rs. 7,39,200/-. To this a sum of Rs. 21,810/- spent on the treatment of the deceased was added to the award which comes to Rs. 7,61,010/-. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- which was already paid as interim compensation was deducted thus leaving balance Rs. 7,11,010/- which was awarded to the appellants as compensation.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants has pressed the appeal mainly on two grounds viz. (1) future prospects of rise in the income of the deceased have not been taken into consideration, (2) multiplier of 14 years adopted is on the lower side. Reliance was placed in the case of Seema Devi Batra and Others v. Rajpal and Others, 2002 ACJ 1601. Correct approach in calculating the loss of monthly dependency - while taking into consideration the prospect of future rise of income has been pointed out by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Dixit and Anr. v. Balwant Yadav and Others, I (2004) ACC 396 (SC)=1996, ACJ 581. The Apex Court took the average of monthly income of deceased at the time of death and the maximum which he would have possibly earned and deducted one third to arrive at the figure representing loss of monthly dependency. In the present case deceased was a Government servant about 39 years old. He had many more years to serve. It can be safely assumed that his salary would have doubled at the zenith of his career, during the next 21 years of the service. So taking the average of the two i.e. 6600 + 13,000 the average monthly income of the deceased taking into consideration future prospects can safely be taken as Rs. 9800/-. After deducting from this one-third towards his personal expenses dependency of the petitioners on the deceased would be about Rs. 6534/-. The deceased in the present case was about 39 years old and according to the Second Schedule to Section 163A of 'the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988' multiplier of 16 years would be applicable as the age of victim was above 35 years but not exceeding 40 years. So the compensation payable to the deceased would come to Rs. 6534 x 12 x 16 years i.e. Rs. 12,54,528/-. Adding to this medical treatment expenses, funeral expenses, loss of consortium, if beneficiary is the spouse, loss of estate, etc. as has been done by the learned Tribunal the total amount payable will come to Rs. 12,54,528 + 21,810 + 2000 + 5000 + 2500 = Rs. 12,85,838/-. The impugned Award is modified to that extent. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Appeal disposed of.