FAO-1866 v. Ramesh Kum

Judgment

1. The appellant-claimant has file filed the present appeal seeking enhancemen cement of the compensation of ₹8,02 8,02,600/- awarded by the Motor Accident Cla ent Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for sho or short ‘the learned Tribunal’) vide Award dated dated 22.09.2014, passed in MACT P ACT Petition No. 234 of 2013 dated

26.09.2013 2013 filed under Section 166 of the The the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The sole claiman laimant is the 52-year-old mother of er of deceased-Pritam who was 24 years old at t old at the time of accident.

2. Brief facts of the case are that re that the learned Tribunal on the basis of pl of pleadings and evidence adduce dduced before it concluded that deceased-Pri Pritam, had died due to injuries, juries, suffered by him in a motor vehicular ac lar accident that took place on 08.0 08.09.2013 due to the rash and negligent dr ent driving of Tractor bearing reg g registration No. HR-16-L-2104 (hereinafter nafter referred to as ‘the offending ve ing vehicle’) owned and driven by RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 6-2015 (O&M) -2- respondent dent No.1-Ramesh Kumar; and ins nd insured by respondent No. 2- Insurance Co nce Company. Learned Tribunal awa al awarded the above compensation along with i with interest @ 6% per annum from from the date of filing the claim petition till a n till actual realization. Respondents N le to ents No. 1 and 2 were held liable to pay the amou e amount of compensation jointly and ly and severally.

3. Learned counsel for the appe t of appellants seeks enhancement of compensatio nsation by submitting that the claima claimant had duly proven on record that the dece e deceased was a Graduate and had had passed Diploma in Computer Application ation (DCA) from Rashtriya Saksh tion, Saksharta Mission IT Education, Delhi; and w and was working as Electrical Wirem Wiremen. Yet, the learned Tribunal had assessed sessed the income of the deceased eased as only ₹4800/- per month. Learned cou counsel for the claimant relies u elies upon the relevant Minimum Wages Noti s Notification issued by the State o .e.f. tate of Haryana applicable w.e.f.

01.07.2013 2013, to submit that as per the said No aid Notification, income of a skilled worker is r is ₹5601.51 (rounded off to to ₹5600/-). Copy of the said Notification cation handed over in Court by learne

nt is learned counsel for the appellant is taken on rec on record. It is, therefore, submitted mitted that monthly income of the deceased de ed deserves to be enhanced. It is fur is further submitted that under the conventional ntional heads the learned Tribunal unal has awarded only ₹25,000/- towards fun s funeral expenses; and nothing ha y of ing has been awarded by way of consortium, rtium, loss of estate; and the rate of in te of interest should also be granted on the highe higher side. It is accordingly, prayed t y be rayed that the present appeal may be accepted an ed and the amount of compensatio nsation awarded to the claimant deserves to b es to be enhanced. RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 6-2015 (O&M) -3-

4. Per Contra, learned couns counsel respondent No. 2 vehemently ently opposes the submissions advanc r the advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and submits that in actual fact l fact compensation in excess has already been been awarded to the appellant-claim claimant, as the learned Tribunal had made an ade an addition of 50% towards futur s future prospects. However, as per law the same e same should be 40%. Accordingly, l ngly, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 prays f prays for dismissal of the present appe t appeal.

5. No other argument is raised on sed on behalf of the parties. I have heard learne learned counsel for the parties and peru nd perused the case file in detail.

6. Perusal of the record shows th e of ws that it was the pleaded case of the appellan pellant-claimant that prior to the acc the accident in question, deceased- Pritam was was a skilled Wireman and earning m ning more than ₹20,000/- per month by way of pr y of private job of motor-winding and and wiring. To prove the income of the decea deceased, the claimant had produced duced documents Ex. P-5 to Ex. P- 10 which sho ich show that the deceased was a Grad a Graduate and had passed Diploma in Compute mputer Application (DCA) from Ras IT m Rashtriya Saksharta Mission IT Education, tion, Delhi and was also awarded th e as ded the Competency Certificate as Electrical W ical Wireman by CIDC New Delhi. Delhi. Thus, it was established on record that th that the deceased was a well qualified uch, ualified and skilled person. As such, income of th e of the deceased ought to have been t , as been taken as ₹5600/- per month, as per Minimu inimum Wages Notification produce oduced by learned counsel for the appellant ap applicable w.e.f. 01.07.2013. Thu . Thus, income of the deceased is assessed as ed as ₹5600/- per month.

7. The record further reveals th als that age of the deceased was determined t ined to be more than 24 years at the at the time of accident, on the basis RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 6-2015 (O&M) -4- of his Secon Secondary School Examination Cer n Certificate, Ex. P-5 wherein his date of birth f birth has been mentioned as 12.10.19 2.10.1988. Accordingly, an addition of 40% ough ought to have been made towards f ards future prospects in conformity with judgme udgment of the Hon’ble Supreme C eme Court in National Insurance Company L any Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and i and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680; whereas the as the learned Tribunal has made an ad e an addition of 50% towards future prospects. Th . The same is liable to be corrected. rected.

8. Keeping in view of the age o age of the deceased, the learned Tribunal ha al has correctly applied multiplier as a tiplier of 18. As deceased was a Bachelor at lor at the time of accident, the learned learned Tribunal has correctly made deduction o tion of 50% towards personal exp al expenses. However, under the Conventiona ntional Heads, the learned Tribunal ibunal has only awarded a sum of ₹25,000/- to towards funeral expenses. The sa o be said amount is also liable to be essed. re-assessed.

9. In view of the above discuss discussion, the present appeal is allowed; and and the amount of compensation ation payable to the claimant is re- assessed as ed as per the structured formula enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Co me Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport C port Corporation, Law Finder Doc I Doc Id # 188882 as follows:- Details Income Before the Tribunal ₹4800/- per month Revised compensation ₹5600/- per month Future prosp prospects Deduction Multiplier Loss dependency 50% ₹4800+2400 = ₹7200/- 50%=₹3600 Annual dependency ₹7200-3600 x 12= ₹ 43,200/- 18 ₹ 43,200/-x 18 = ₹7,77,600/- RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. 40% ₹5600+2240=₹7840/- 50%= ₹3920/- Annual dependency ₹7840-3920 x 12= ₹ 47,040/- 18 ₹ ₹8,46,720/- 47,040/- x 18 = FAO-1866 6-2015 (O&M) -5- Loss consortium al expenses Funeral expe f Estate Loss of Esta Total compensati Interest ensation Nil ₹25,000/- Nil ₹8,02,600/- ₹40,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹9,16,720/- 6% per annum 6%

10. Pending application(s), if any, s any, shall also stand disposed of. 2026

26.02.2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.