CHAUTH MAL SHRINGI Vs. ABDUL KALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been submitted by the claimants appellants against the impugned judgment and award dtd. 28/7/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Kota (for short 'the Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claims Case No. 1290/2014 (105/09) whereby an award of Rs.2,50,298.00 was passed by way of compensation on account of death of Vikram in an accident which occurred on 4/11/2008.

(2.) The Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence available on the record and after hearing counsel for the parties decided the claim petition of the appellants-claimants awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.2,50,298.00 under various heads in favour of the claimants-appellants.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 18 years, he was a student and pursuing B.B.A. course. But the Tribunal without any basis determined the notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000.00 per year. Counsel further submits that in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and Anr. v. Lala and Ors. reported in MACD 2013 (SC) 289, the Hon'ble Apex Court has determined the notional income of the students/persons above 15 years of age as Rs.30,000.00 per year. Counsel further submits that looking to the age of the deceased i.e. 18 years, the multiplier of 18 should have been applied, but in the instant case the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 15. Counsel further submits that no amount towards future prospects has been awarded in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Ors.(2017) 16 SCC 680. Counsel further submits that under the conventional head also, very meager amount of compensation has been awarded, which needs suitable enhancement by this Court. Counsel further prays that re-computation of the award in the present case may be done in the light of the judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and Pranay Sethi (supra).