BIMLA Vs. NARENDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present appeal the appellant seeks to challenge the impugned award dated 13. 4. 2007 whereby an amount of Rs. 3,30,680/- has been awarded in favour of the appellants.

(2.) BRIEF summary of the facts of the case are that on 5. 2. 2006 at about 9:45 pm, Ms. Shagun Singh (now deceased) along with her cousin Sh. Yaduvender singh was travelling on motorcycle as a pillion rider and received fatal injuries when hit from behind by a bus bearing Registration No. DL-1pb-5602. A criminal case vide FIR No. 51/2006, under Section 279/304-A IPC was registered at p. S. I. P. Estate against Sh. Narender, driver of the offending bus.

(3.) MR. Manish Mannie, counsel appearing for the appellants contends that the Tribunal has not correctly assessed the income of the deceased. The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that the deceased was working as customer Care Executive with M/s Chawla Electronics, Daryaganj, Delhi and was drawing a salary of Rs. 6,000/- per month, but the said salary was not accepted by the Tribunal, although the appellants had examined the Accountant of the said firm, who has proved the salary certificate of the deceased on record as Exhibit pw-3/c. Counsel further contends that the testimony of the said witness has been disbelieved by the Tribunal simply on account of the fact that the said witness did not produce the appointment letter, the attendance record of the deceased and also the salary register. The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that, being a small firm the employer M/s Chawla Electronics was not maintaining all such records and, therefore, the Tribunal has committed grave error in not accepting the income of the deceased as duly proved on record by the independent statement of the Accountant of the employer firm. The appellants are also aggrieved by the fact that the Tribunal has not properly taken into account the future increase and has erred in wrongly assessing the increased income from Rs. 47,820/- per annum to Rs. 51,000/- per annum and then taking the mean of the same. The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that once the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased under the Minimum Wages act, then as per the settled legal position, the income was required to be doubled then average of the same should have been taken to determine the financial loss of the dependents. The contention of the counsel for the appellants is that this Court has already taken a view that the income under the minimum Wages Act gets doubled within a period of 10 years, therefore, safely the income of Rs. 3720/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal under the Minimum wages Act should have been first doubled and then the average of the same should have been taken into consideration by the Tribunal. Counsel for the appellant also sought to urge that the deceased was a bright student and had scored about 72. 5% in her CBSE exams and students with such qualification are easily taken into employment by various BPOs on a handsome salary.