(1) FA. 1003.2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 1003 OF 2005 1] Smt. Sushma Sudhakar Kadam Age : 54 years, Occu.: Household 2] Miss. Nutan Sudhakar Kadam, Age : 24 years, Occu.: Household 3] Miss. Kirti Sudhakar Kadam, Age: 19 years, Occu.: Education All R/o: 1304/10, Shukrawar Peth, Near Wadiya Hospital, Pune-411 002 .. Appellants [Ori. Petitioners nos.1,3 and 4] VERSUS 1] Waman S/o Shrawan Zanke Age : Major, Occu.: Driver, R/o : Dharangaon, Tq. Malkapur, Dist. Buldhana 2] Rahulkumar S/o Navinchand Jain Age : Major, Occu.: Owner of Truck R/o : 206, Tagorenagar, Indore (M.P.) 3] The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Central Fule Market, IInd Floor, Jalgaon 4] Gokul S/o Pralhad Patil, Age : Major, Occu.: Driver R/o Samata Nagar, State Bank Colony, Jalgaon 5] Dr. Kishore P. Mali, Age: Major, Occu.: Car Owner, R/o : 14, Tagore Nagar, Jalgaon 6] National Insurance Co. Ltd., 70, Navi Peth, Jalgaon (2) FA. 1003.2005 7] Ku. Smita Sudhakar Kadam @ Mrs. Smita Sandip Rane, Age : 31 years, Occu.: Household, R/o : Sugam Apartment, Flat No.15, IIIrd Floor, Fadke Road, Near 90 Ft. Road, Mulund (East) Mumbai-81 .. Respondents Mr. L.V. Sangit, Advocate h/f. Mr. V.J. Dixit, Sr. Advocate for the Appellants Mr. R.J. Godbole, Advocate for respondent no.3 Mr. V.N. Upadhye, Advocate for respondent no.6 F.A. stands dismissed against respondent nos. 2,4, and 7 vide Court's order dated 20.4.2009 None present for respondent nos. 1 and 5 though served. ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 22ND APRIL, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT:- 1] Heard. Admit. Heard finally. Record and proceedings is available, perused by the parties. The inadequate grant of compensation in M.A.C.P. no. 245 of 1994 by the learned Member, M.A.C.T., Jalgaon, made the claimants to rush to this Court. 2] Sudhakar, 55 was Deputy Manager in Union Bank of India at Pune with monthly salary of Rs. 10,210=50. He was the only earning member in the family. The claimant nos.2 to 4 are taking education. Claimant no.1 is his widow. The claimants claim an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation with interest. The learned Judge (3) FA. 1003.2005 considered the income of the deceased as Rs.5741=10 in the light of the evidence of Shri Jagtap, the Bank Officer, resultantly awarded an amount of Rs. 2,14,140/- payable by the respective respondents in proportion. 3] I need not to traverse to the factum of accident, same is not criticized by the respondents. The short controversy that rest is about the computation of income of the deceased Sudhakar. The certificate of salary of said Sudhakar produced before the learned Judge, illustrate that he had basic pay of Rs.4910/-, medical allowance of Rs.100/-, dearness allowance of Rs.4691=55, H.R.A. of Rs.5892=20, city allowance of Rs.220/-. The total monthly emoluments was Rs.10,510=75. Both the counsel accept that this extract of salary details of February, 1994 produced on record is not exhibited. I find substance in it. However, apart from above salary details, there is income tax return, in the form of acknowledgment from the Income Tax Office exhibit 79 showing the annual salary of deceased Sudhakar Bapurao Kadam as Rs.94,922/-. At exhibit 80, salary is shown Rs.89,490/-. At exhibit 81, salary is shown as Rs.1,01,108/-. Drawing mean of the annual income, it comes to annually Rs.95173.33. Total annual income by multiplier of five, comes to Rs.4,75,866.67. From this annual income, an amount of Rs.1,58,622.22 is to be deducted as 1/3rd to meet (4) FA. 1003.2005 the medical expenses of the deceased. Ultimately, the annual income of the deceased needs to be assessed at Rs.3,17,244.45. The deceased was having a valid service tenure of further 5 years even if he was of 55 years. The multiplier of 5 needs to be applied as the widow is getting pension amount instead of applying multiplier of 8 indicated in terms of Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, as the deceased having left behind him the legacy of dependency and short earning by way of pension. No award is made on account of sufferings or loss of future income. 4] In the light of above observations, ultimately the entitlement of the claimant comes to Rs.3,17,244=45 with costs. Interest would be @7.5% per annum. 50% amount of the claim to be borne by the original respondent nos. 1 to 3 while 50% to be borne and paid by respondent nos. 4,5 and 6. First Appeal is allowed in the above terms. Sd/- (K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.) arp