KAMLESH AND ORS. Vs. BABU LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeals, filed by wife and mother of the deceased, are directed against the award dated 19.8.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track), Kotputli District Jaipur, in Claim Case No. 579/2008.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that the deceased Rakesh was employed in the Indian Army and was posted in the Office of Commandant 39 Assam Riffles C/299. The narrow dispute raised jointly by the counsel for appellants is that the salary income, though as per the certificate last drawn by the deceased was Rs. 7214, but the Tribunal has taken into consideration only Rs. 6409 as the income of the deceased, and in both the instant appeals though claim of enhancement has been filed, but claim of the mother is that she was awarded only Rs. 50,000 out of the total amount allowed by the Tribunal, whereas she also ought to have been allowed equal amount as that to the wife of the deceased.

(3.) Learned counsel Mr. J.P. Sharma appearing for the wife (Kamlesh) contends that (i) the income of the deceased as per salary -sheet placed on record, was Rs. 7214 which ought to have been taken into consideration by the Tribunal whereas an amount of Rs. 805 which were normal deductions on account of the deceased being in the Indian Army, the Tribunal has considered monthly income of the amount remaining after deductions without any reason. (ii) He further contended that future prospects have not been considered at all by the Tribunal, whereas in catena of judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court it has been held that at least in the cases where the deceased, like the present one who was in the Indian Army, having permanent job and regularity of income, future prospects @ 50% should have been awarded. (iii) He further contends that the amount allowed on account of loss of love and affection, is quite meager and nothing has been allowed on account of consortium, so also funeral expenses allowed is also quite low, and thus contends that on these issues the amount needs to be awarded/enhanced. (iv) He further contends that insofar as the mother is concerned, she was dependant on her other son and the Tribunal was even not justified in allowing Rs. 50,000 to her. He further contends that the mother has sold several properties thereafter and is well placed, and entire amount if any enhanced is to be granted to wife.