1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1331/2008 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ghewar Ram & Ors. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1331/2008 United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Ghewar Ram & Ors. Date : 17.9.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.RK Mehta, for the appellant. None present for the respondents. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant insurance company to challenge the award passed in favour of the claimant in MACT Case No.49/2003 which has been decided along with other claim cases by the impugned judgment dated 13.7.2004 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (First), Jodhpur. The appellant have raised two grounds. One is that the claimant Ghewar Ram himself is earning person as he is employed person and in the present accident, wife of claimant died. In view of the Division Bench judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court delivered in the case of 2 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1331/2008 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ghewar Ram & Ors. Daljeet Singh and others vs. Hardeep Singh and others reported in 2002(1) T.A.C. 613 (M.P.), the earning husband cannot claim any compensation on account of the death of his earning wife in the accident and the second ground is that while computing the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has not deducted 1/3rd of the amount out of the income of deceased which the deceased would have used for her own expenditure. So far as the first contention of the appellant that the earning husband of victim deceased cannot claim any compensation on account of loss of income to him due to the death of his wife in an accident because he himself is earning, is concerned, the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Daljeet Singh (supra) has decided so in para no.15 of the judgment which reads as under :- “15. So far as this aspect of the matter is concerned, it cannot be over-looked that the husband of the deceased was also an earning member of the family of the deceased. On his own showing he had an income of Rs.5,000/- per month. Where both the husband and wife are earning members of the family, in normal course both must have been contributing towards the house hold expenditure. In the facts and circumstances of the present 3 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1331/2008 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ghewar Ram & Ors. case, it cannot be said that the husband would in any way be dependant on the wife though the wife in the ordinary course of nature would have shared a part of the burden of the house-hold. The husband, therefore, claim any compensation on the basis of the dependency.” With due respect, I am not in agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court and if the said view as such is accepted, then that will amount to holding that every claimant will have to prove that he is totally dependent or dependent on the person who suffered death in the accident and then only, he will able to claim compensation. In a case where the income of the claimant will be more than the deceased, then no compensation will be awarded to the claimant, that is not the spirit of the provisions of the Act. The non-reduction of 1/3rd of the compensation amount from the income of the deceased is not a mandatory rule but it is one of method of calculating the compensation which can be awarded to the appellant. At the same time, there is a principle of adding income towards future prospects of increase of income of the deceased. In this case, that has not been taken into 4 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1331/2008 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Ghewar Ram & Ors. account by the Tribunal while awarding the compensation to the claimant. In the totality of the facts of the case, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs.2,80,000/- cannot be said to be excessive in any manner so as to be interfered with by this Court in appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, this appeal, having no merits, is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya