UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. M BABY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved over the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Salem in MCOP. No. 1 of 2016 dated 06.04.2017, the United India Insurance Co.Ltd.,/appellant herein, who is the second respondent in the above said MCOP has filed this Appeal to set aside the award of a sum of Rs.1,12,62,008/- passed by the Claims Tribunal as erroneous.

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

(3.) The Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No.TN 30 AR 5319, Mahendira XUV 500. In the present appeal there is no challenge on the issue of negligence. Post mortem report of the deceased was marked as Ex.P.2 and the death certificate was marked as Ex.P.7 through P.W.1. The age of the deceased was mentioned 32 years in the post mortem report and in the death certificate. Therefore the Tribunal has rightly taken the age of the deceased as 32 years while determining the compensation for the respondents 1 to 4 in the present appeal. At the time of death, the deceased was working as II Additional District Munsif Judge, Salem. To substantiate this contention PW1 produced Ex.P.6 salary certificates, Ex.P.5 B.L., degree certificate and Ex.P.18 appointment order of the deceased. On the perusal of Ex.P.5, Ex.P.6 and Ex.P.18 it clearly establish that the deceased Prakash was drawing the salary of Rs.65,281/- for the month of October 2015. Therefore the Tribunal had rightly took the income of the deceased as Rs.65,281/-. Since the age of the deceased was 32 years, the Tribunal has rightly added 50% of the income of the deceased for future prospects by following the judgment in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi, 2017 13 Scale 12. Therefore the monthly income of the deceased along with future prospects was determined by the Tribunal as Rs.97,921/- (Rs.65,281/- + Rs.32,640/-). Further the Tribunal had rightly deducted 1/3rd of the total income along with future prospects for the purpose of personal expenses of the deceased. While deducting 1/3rd for the deceased Bachelor for his personal expenses the Tribunal had taken into consideration the Widowed mother and three dependant sisters. Further Tribunal in this regard had followed the principles laid down in Sarla Verma and others Vs.Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 ACJ 1298, SC. Therefore the monthly income of the deceased for the purpose of determining the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is Rs.97,921/- out of which 1/3rd was deducted for the personal expenses of the deceased. The balance monthly income i.e, 2/3rd of Rs.65,280/- was determined as loss of income for the family. Hence, the loss of income for the family for one year will be a sum of Rs.7,83,360/- = (Rs.65,280/- x 12) out of which a sum of Rs.84,172/- (Rs.81,672/- + Rs.2,500/-) was deducted towards income tax and professional tax of the deceased. After deducting the above said tax amount the loss of income for the purpose of determining the compensation will be a sum of Rs.6,99,188/- (Rs.7,83,360 Rs.84,172)