(1) HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Misc. Appeal No. 584/1998 Rajal Bai and others Vs. Rafiq Khan and another As Per : G.S. Solanki, J. Shri Rajesh Nema, Advocate for appellant. Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate for respondent No. 2. Date of hearing: 17.3.2011 Date of Order : 23.3.2011 O R D E R 1. The appellants have preferred this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act being aggrieved by award dated 2.4.1998 passed by First Additional MACT, Sehore, Camp Ashta in Claim Case No. 22/95 whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 1,11,000/- on account of death of Madan Singh to the claimants/appellants. 2. The facts of the case in short are that on 16.2.1995 at about 4:45 PM, deceased Madan Singh was going towards Aamla Majju to attend a marriage ceremony. He was going on the side of the road and when he reached to Aamla-Majju jod, he was dashed by a bus of M.P. State Road Transport Corporation bearing registration No. MKH-7955, which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1, due to which Madan Singh died. (2) Appellants/claimants are legal heirs/dependent of deceased Madan Singh. 3. It is pleaded that deceased Madan Singh was a Silavat Mistri and used to earn a sum of Rs. 100-125/- per day. He also owned agricultural land and used to sell about 7 qtn. of Soyabeen and 2-4 qtn of wheat per annum from his agricultural land. It is further pleaded that Madan Singh was aged 40 years at the time of the accident in question. 4. Respondent No. 1 remained absent before the Tribunal, therefore, the Tribunal proceeded ex-parte against him. Respondent No. 2 denied the whole case of the appellants/claimants and prayed for dismissal of claim case. 5. Learned Tribunal framed as many as 4 issues and after appraisal of evidence on record, awarded compensation of Rs. 1,11,000/- to the appellants/claimants, hence this appeal has been preferred for enhancement. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has committed error in not appreciating the evidence on record in its proper perspective. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has not properly assessed the income of the deceased and appropriate multiplier has also not been applied, therefore, compensation be suitably enhanced. (3) 7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has justified the findings recorded and supported the order passed by the Tribunal. 8. I have perused the impugned award, evidence and other material on record. Rajal Bai (PW-1) wife of deceased deposed that her husband Madan Singh died due to the accident which took place at Indore-Bhopal National Highway. He was aged about 40 years at the time of the accident. She further deposed that she blessed with 4 children and mother-in-law Rambha Bai is also living with her. She further deposed that her husband was a Silavat Mistri and used to earn a sum of Rs. 100-125/- per day. She admitted in her cross examination that her husband used to earn a sum of Rs. 2000-4000/- per month and his average income was Rs. 12-13,000/- per annum. 9. It is not in dispute that deceased Madan Singh was Silavat Mistri/Meson and the Tribunal on the basis of admission of his wife assessed his income at Rs. 1000/- per month only. In my opinion, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased as being a meson, he was a skilled labour at the time of accident, if his income is assessed on the basis of minimum wages, it should have been Rs. 80/- per day and if Madan Singh used to work about 25 days in a month, his monthly income comes to Rs. 2000/- and annual income comes to Rs. 24,000/-. Since dependents are more than 4, (4) therefore, in view of the decision of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and others – 2009 ACJ 1298 1/4th deduction has to be made on account of self expenditure, thus annual loss of dependency comes to Rs. 18,000/-. Age of the deceased was 40, multiplier of 15 is applicable, thus compensation on account of loss of dependency comes to Rs. 18,000 x 15 = Rs.2,70,000/-. In addition claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs. 3,000/- for funeral expenses, Rs. 5,000/- for loss of estate and widow is entitled for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium. Thus, total compensation comes to Rs. 2,83,000/- (Rs. Two Lakhs Eighty Three Thousand only). The enhanced compensation to carry the interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. The disbursement of the amount shall be according to the direction given by the Tribunal in the impugned award. 10. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed in part to the aforesaid extent. No costs. (G.S.Solanki) Judge PB