GEETHA KUMARI Vs. RUBBER BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the salary of a dependant who was given employment on compassionate grounds on the death of a person who was injured in a motor accident is to be deducted from the compensation payable on account of his death? The learned Tribunal deducted a portion of the amount from the total amount of compensation. In this appeal by the petitioners before the M. A. C. T. , they arc mainly challenging the direction to deduct a portion of the salary that the 1st petitioner widow may receive throughout her career.

(2.) THE 1st petitioner before the Tribunal is the widow and petitioners 2 and 3 are the minor children of deceased V. R. Aravindakshan nair, who died in a motor accident. Subsequently additional petitioners 4 and 5 who are the father and mother of the deceased were also impleaded. While the deceased was travelling in a jeep KLK 7675 belonging to his employer (Rubber board, Kottayam) in connection with his official duty, it met with a n accident. According to the petitioners, the jeep was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the 3rd respondent. THE vehicle was not road worthy. THE accident took place due to this reason as well as to the rash and negligent driving ot" the vehicle. In the accident the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries within four hours of the accident. THE deceased who was aged 29 years, was employed as Research Assistant in the Pathology division of the Rubber Board (1st respondent) on a monthly salary of Rs. 1171 ps 90. But for his death he could have continued in service up to the age of 58. He was a Post Graduate in Agriculture. He would have got promotion to the post of Director. Even after retirement lie could have worked and earned. At the time of his death he had put in three years of service. THE pay scale of research Assistant was revised with effect from 1-1-1986. On completion of 10 years of service normally a Research Assistant would gel promotion to the higher grade. His total emoluments by. the time he retired from service would have been Rs. 13. 09 lakhs. However, the petitioners claimed only Rs. 6 lakhs as compensation after giving allowance for the imponderables as well as the amounts that the deceased would have spent upon himself.

(3.) THE points that arise for consideration are: (i)Whether any part of the salary that may be received by the 1st petitioner should be deducted from the total amount of compensation payable? (h) What is the compensation payable in this case?