MOHARI DEVI Vs. RAJENDER PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present appeal the appellants seek to challenge the impugned Award dated 27. 07. 2006 so as to claim enhancement in compensation amount over and above the amount of Rs. 1,85,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.

(2.) THE conspectus of facts relevant for deciding the appeal are:-That on 26. 6. 92 Shri Rameshwar alias Shanti Swaroop, the deceased was driving taxi bearing registration no. DL1t-0337. He had taken his friends namely shri Kishan Lal, Shri Ashok Kumar, Shri Mangat Singh and Shri Joginder Singh who were all residents of Delhi to Haridwar for "ganga shanan" in said taxi. On the next day at about 8. 00 a. m. while they all were returning in the same taxi and had reached near Kasba Purkaji nearby Peer at Rourkee, one truck bearing registration No. URM 1137 was parked diagonally on the road facing Purkaji. As soon as the car reached near the truck, the truck driver reversed the truck suddenly, without giving any signal and struck the taxi which resulted in the driver of the car sustaining grievous injury and the other occupants also received injuries. Shri Rameshwar was taken to Government Hospital at muzafarnagar but he died on the way.

(3.) MR. Rajesh Yadav, counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the tribunal has not properly assessed the income of the deceased although, the same was duly proved on record. Contention of the counsel for the appellants is that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 2,500/- per month and the said income was duly proved by the appellants in their evidence. Counsel for the appellants thus contended that the Tribunal has wrongly taken the help of the Minimum Wages Act for assessing the loss of financial dependence. The appellants are further aggrieved on account of 1/3rd deduction from the income of the deceased towards personal expenses although the deceased was survived by a large family comprising of his widow, three children and his parents. The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that for such a large family the deceased would not have been spending 1/3rd of his income towards personal expenses. The appellants are also aggrieved because of lower rate of interest i. e. 6% per annum granted by the Tribunal on the amount of compensation, which as per the counsel for the appellants should not have been less than 7. 5% per annum. Meager amount of Rs. 10,000/- has been awarded towards loss of consortium, although the deceased died at quite a young age of 38 years. Counsel for the appellants contended that the appellants are also aggrieved on account of the fact that the Tribunal has not given any benefit of the future prospects.