THULASEEDHARAN S/O BHASKARAN Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimants are the appellants herein, who are concerned with the death of their son in a motor vehicle accident at the young age of 23, when he was studying for his Graduation in Nursing (B.Sc Nursing). The claimants/appellants also asserted before the Tribunal that the son had an income from his engagements as a Financial Advisor coming to Rs. 6,000/- per month. However, there was no evidence led on that count. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 14,05,500/-. On a reading of the award and looking at the quantum of compensation, this Court is of the opinion that if at all any revision is required, it is only with respect to loss of dependency.

(2.) As to the loss of dependency, the Tribunal calculated the notional income at Rs. 7500/- and considering the age of the deceased, 50% addition was made for future prospects. Half of the amount assessed as annual income was deducted for personal expenses as per the decision in Sarala Verma (SMT) and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 case. Again relying on the very same decision, the multiplier applied was 18. A total compensation for loss of dependency was calculated at Rs. 12,15,000/-, which, the learned counsel submits, is very minimal, considering the course in which the deceased was studying and also his future prospects.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants relied on Aravind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Company Ltd, (2010) 10 SCC 254 and Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi v. Ramkaran Ramchandra Sharma, (2015) 2 SCC 180. In Aravind Kumar Mishra's case , the disablement was of a final year student of Engineering at the Birla Institute of Technology, a premier institute in the country. The future earning was assessed at Rs. 60,000/- per annum relatable to the year 1993 when the accident occurred. In Ashvinbhai Jayantilal Modi , a medical student's future income prospects was assessed on the basis of a notional fixation of Rs. 25,000/- per month in the year 2010. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for the appellants submit that there should be a substantial increase in the income assessed of the deceased. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Company, however, would submit that there can be no equation of the income which could be earned by a medical student or by a B.Tech student studying in the Birla Institute of Technology.