TARA DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. MANOJ & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application is allowed for the reasons stated therein. Delay of 473 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.

(2.) Claimants had lost their young son in a motor vehicular accident when he was 20 1/2 years old. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind ('the Tribunal' for short) has awarded a total sum of Rs.2,69,200.00. The deceased had passed his senior secondary examination, i.e. 10+2. It was claimed that the deceased was running a welding shop and also working as an agent of PACL Company. However, no evidence was produced on the file to prove those facts. The learned Tribunal assumed that the deceased was a casual worker and assessed the income at Rs.120.00 per day equivalent to Rs.3,600.00 per month. Since the deceased was unmarried and therefore, 50% was deducted towards personal expenses. The learned Tribunal applied a multiplier of 12, considering the age of the parents of the deceased and also awarded Rs.10,000.00 towards transportation and for funeral.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that the multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is erroneous, as the age of the parents could not be considered for the purpose of working out compensation payable. He has further submitted that no amount has been awarded on account of future prospects. He has submitted that as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.25590 of 2014 (National Insurance Company Limited Vs Pranay Sethi and others) decided on 31.10.2017, 40% amount is to be added towards future prospects. He also submits that the deceased could not be taken as unskilled labourer as he had already passed Senior Secondary examination.