SUSHEELA KAMBLE Vs. PRITESH VITHOBA KALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.J. Mulgaonkar, learned Counsel for the appellants, and Mr. Suraj Naik, learned Counsel for respondent no.2.

(2.) The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dtd. 16/4/2014 to the extent the Tribunal has not awarded the claimed compensation of 10,50,000/- but awarded compensation of only 4,34,000/-.

(3.) Mr. Mulgaonkar submits that, in this case, the Tribunal erred in taking the monthly income of the deceased Sanju at 4,500/- when, in fact, his employer (AW3) had deposed that the deceased was a truck driver employed by him and was paid a salary of 12,000/- per month.