ANJALI AND OTHERS Vs. JAVED AHMED AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals are for enhancement of compensation for death of persons in motor accident. The point urged in appeals is only as regards the quantum.

(2.) FAO No. 3123 of 2004 addresses a claim for compensation for death of a male, aged 26 years. The claimants were widow and two minor children. He was an income tax assessee, who had been assessed to annual income of L 69,000/-. The Court had provided for a 1/3rd deduction and applied a multiplier of 10. The learned counsel argues that both as regards the choice of multiplier and multiplicand, the Tribunal has adopted modest figures which are out of sync with the decision of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 ACJ 1298. The learned counsel also argues that there was a sure prospect of future increase as well and he had a steady climb in his income over a period of years and income tax returns had been filed also prior to his death.

(3.) The prospect of future increase will have to be invariably taken on the quality of evidence. It is not a rule of thumb that in every case where there is a proof regarding income, there shall also be approximation for a further future increase.