MANJU DEVI Vs. AMIT KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the claimants under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Appellants are not satisfied with the quantum of compensation decided by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan in Claim Case No.962/2014.

(2.) In brief, the case of the claimants is that Sohan Lal Sood aged about 51 years, who was husband of claimant-Manju Devi and father of claimant-Hitansh, was crossing road to purchase medicines on 20/9/2014 at about 07:30 p.m. At the same time, a rash and negligent motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ-14-BX-0976 dashed against him causing serious injuries which resulted in death of Sohan Lal on 21/9/2014 while getting treatment in the referred hospital. For the accident aforesaid, Galta Gate Police Station case No.335 dtd. 21/9/2014 was registered and after investigation, police submitted charge-sheet. Ex.12 is the certificate of insurance which shows that the offending motorcycle was insured with respondent No.2-National Insurance Company Limited. The factum of motor vehicle accident and insurance of the vehicle is proved by the oral and documentary evidences available on record and are not challenged in this appeal.

(3.) Mr. Kapil Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants contends that without any basis, the Tribunal deducted Rs.2338.00against income-tax payment whereas the salary certificate of the deceased would show that at the time of his death, Sohan Lal was paying Rs.1244.00 as income-tax. Grievance is that 1/3rd deduction against personal expenses of the deceased is also not justified. The learned Tribunal has not considered award of any amount against future prospect of the deceased. Multiplier of 11 has been applied by the Tribunal which should have been at much higher pedestal considering the prospect of deceased. The interest should have been 12% instead of 6% as awarded by the Tribunal.