(1.) This appeal impugns the award of compensation dated 05.06.2018, passed by the learned MACT in Case No. 357310-16, on the ground that the multiplier of 17 had been wrongly applied by the learned Tribunal.
(2.) The Court would note that in terms of the dicta of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, the multiplier of 16 would be applicable only to a person who falls in the age bracket of 31 to 35 years. The deceased was over 30 years, but had not yet attained the age of 31 years, therefore, the lesser multiplier i.e. 16 would not be applicable. The appellant's contention is untenable and is rejected.
(3.) The appellant further contends that the flexible allowance which comprises medical allowance, leave travel allowance, recommendation for his services, company lease accommodation and telephone allowance, etc., was not fixed, therefore, the amount of Rs. 23,272/- on these account heads could not be taken as a regular component for computation of 'loss of dependency'. However, the appellant does not explain the component of medical allowance from the said amount, which it wants to be deducted. It is also not shown whether the same is a fixed monthly amount. In the absence of anything to the contrary, that the claimants were dependent on said amount, the appellant's contention is baseless that the deceased was entitled to the allowances, which would enure to his benefit and to the benefit of his family too. Had he been alive, these benefits would have been available to the claimants. In the circumstances, there is no reason to exclude the said amounts.