G.MUTHULAKSHMI Vs. G.RAVISANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is a case of fatal. The manner of the accident is not in dispute. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.9,36,000.00 towards loss of income, Rs.50,000.00 towards loss of consortium, Rs.50,000.00 towards loss of love and affection, Rs.10,000.00 towards funeral expenses, Rs.10,000.00 towards transportation charges and Rs.1,000.00 towards loss of estate, totally Rs.10,57,000.00 as compensation. The Tribunal has directed the respondents to pay the entire compensation amount with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. The appellants / claimants 1 to 3 have filed this appeal seeking to enhance the quantum of compensation.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellants / claimants 1 to 3 would submit that at the time of the accident, the deceased was aged about 45 years. Before the accident, the deceased was working as Carpenter and earning a sum of Rs.21,000.00 per month. Though the Tribunal has taken only a sum of Rs.9,000.00 as notional income of the deceased, it has failed to add any amount towards future prospects. As the deceased was in a private employment, as per the decision reported in 2017(2) TN MAC 609 ( SC) [National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others ], 25% of the income ought to have been added by the Tribunal as future prospects. He would further submit that though the deceased was aged about 45 years at the time of the accident, the Tribunal has erroneously taken the age of the deceased as 46 years and adopted multiplier No.13, instead of multiplier No.14. Thus, he prayed to enhance the compensation towards loss of income by adding future prospects and applying correct multiplier No.14.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent / Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal has already awarded excessive amount as compensation and therefore, the same need not be interfered with.