SUSILAN Vs. SEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and perused the records carefully.

(2.) It is a case of fatal. The manner of the accident is not in dispute. The appellants / claimants have filed this appeal seeking to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellants / claimants submitted that the deceased was the only daughter of the appellants and at the time of the accident, she was doing M.Tec. course. The Tribunal has taken only a sum of Rs. 5,000/- p.m. as the notional income of the deceased and considering the educational qualification of the deceased, the Tribunal ought to have fixed a sum of Rs. 15,000/- p.m. as the notional income of the deceased and then, ought to have added 40% towards future prospects in the said income of the deceased. In support of his contention, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants / claimants relied upon a decision of this Court in (United India Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Velumyil, (2013) 2 TNMAC 846). He would further submit that the Tribunal, without adopting the multiplier No.17 by taking into account the age of the deceased, has adopted only Multiplier No.15 by taking into account the age of the mother of the deceased. He would further submit that the Tribunal has awarded only lesser amount on the other heads. Thus, he prayed to enhance the award amount.