ANJANA ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. ARUP MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a judgment/award dated 17.02.2007 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, 5th Court and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Alipore, 24 Parganas (South) in M.A.C.C. No. 90 of 2006. This Court has heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and has considered the materials on record.

(2.) The widow and the married daughter of the deceased victim has filed the claim application as one Sandip Kumar Roy Chowdhury who happened to be the husband of the appellant No. 1 and the father of the appellant No. 2 died in a motor vehicle accident on 08.11.2002. The learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellants/claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 5,58,792/- minus Rs. 50,000/- which was already received by the claimants/appellants under the provisions of section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The learned Tribunal also granted funeral expenses of Rs. 9,000/- and thus the total compensation came to Rs. 5,17,792/-. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the appellants/claimants have already received the said compensation before the learned Tribunal concerned.

(3.) The learned Advocate for the claimants/appellants submits that the learned Tribunal ought not to have proceeded on the basis of net pay as certain deductions, appearing in the salary certificate, should not have been allowed to be deducted from the gross salary for the purpose of calculation of the compensation amount. The said learned Advocate submits that it is true that the travelling allowance and the C.C. Amount should be deducted from the gross salary apart from the professional tax but other deductions, shown in the deduction column, should not be allowed to be deducted from the gross salary while calculating the compensation amount. The said learned Advocate further submits, by referring to page 84 of the paper book, that the deceased, in due course of time, if he had been in service could have earned much more as the promotion was due sometime in July, 2006, We also find substance in such submission of the said learned Advocate.