PICHAIAPPAN Vs. R.PADMANABHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J., The claimants are the appellants, who are before this Court, challenging the award dated 30.07.2014 passed by the learned I Additional District Judge [Motor Accident Claims Tribunal], Tindivanam in MCOP No.167 of 2013, seeking enhancement of compensation.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal had erred in taking into account the age of the parents for fixing the multiplier contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2015) 6 SCC 347 [Munna Lal Jain and another vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and others] wherein it is held that multiplier has to be fixed considering the age of the deceased. It is his further contention that the Tribunal ought not to have reduced the income of the deceased to Rs.15,000/ - per month, when proof of income for earning a sum of Rs.18,000/ - p.m. has been produced, which clearly shows that the deceased was a qualified Engineer. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future prospects as per the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2012) 6 SCC 421 [Santosh Devi vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others]. Accordingly, he prays for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.