SBCMA No.168/2008 Smt. Ramudi & Ors. Vs. Hansraj Sharma & Ors. 1 SBCMA No.168/2008 Smt. Ramudi & Ors. Vs. Hansraj Sharma & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : - 3.12.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Parikshit Nayak,for the appellants. Mr. Dinesh Mehta, for the respondent no.2. <><><> Notice for final disposal was issued to the respondents vide order dated 4.2.2008 in the appeal preferred by the claimants against the award dated 9.5.2007 by which the learned tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,44,000/- to the claimants on account of loss they suffered due to death of one Madho @ Ladu Ram in the accident occurred on 22.12.2000 by the insured Tanker No.HR 29D 1493, which was being driven by the driver Raja Ram who also died in the accident and said truck was in the ownership of respondent no.3 and was insured by respondent no.2. The only point canvassed is that the deceased was earing Rs.4,000/- per month, which has been proved by the statement of deceased's wife Smt. Ramudi AW-1, but the tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.1600/- SBCMA No.168/2008 Smt. Ramudi & Ors. Vs. Hansraj Sharma & Ors. 2 per month only and gave deduction of Rs.500/- from the said income on account of expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself. The deceased was of the age of 22 years and multiplier of 17 was applied and total compensation awarded on this count is Rs.2,44,400/-. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has committed serious error by not accepting the evidence of the claimant and rejected the evidence of claimant without there being any rebuttal by any of the respondents. It is also submitted that even in a case where unemployed and even a minor person dies, the minimum income is assessed Rs.3,000/- per month normally. In this case, admittedly, the deceased was working as Khalasi and this fact has not been disputed by anybody, therefore, the deceased was an employed person working in truck and was of the age of 22 years and he would have earned more in future, therefore, the future income prospects should have been taken into account by the trial court while assessing the loss to claimants. Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the driver SBCMA No.168/2008 Smt. Ramudi & Ors. Vs. Hansraj Sharma & Ors. 3 and owner of the vehicle yet learned counsel for the Insurance Company who has limited right stated that the deceased was working with the driver of the vehicle and not was in regular employment, therefore, the tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.1600/- per month. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The deceased was of the age of 22 years and a young person and was earning and this fact was not in dispute. In the present time it is difficult to believe that one person in employment would earn less than Rs.3,000/- per month when he is of the age of 22 years. The tribunal without any reason assessed the income of Rs.1600/- per month. Even if the deceased would have incurred 1/3rd of income upon himself then he would have incurred Rs.1,000/- per month for himself then loss to the dependents can be reasonably assessed to Rs.2,000/- per month thereby annul loss of income to the claimants comes to Rs.24,000/- per annum and multiplier of 17 was rightly applied by the tribunal. By applying multiplier SBCMA No.168/2008 Smt. Ramudi & Ors. Vs. Hansraj Sharma & Ors. 4 of 17, the total loss to the claimants comes to Rs.4,08,000/-. Therefore, the compensation on this count is enhanced from Rs.2,44,400/- to Rs.4,08,000/-. Rest of the award is kept as it is. The appellants shall be entitled to interest over the enhanced amount @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition. Hence, the appeal of the appellant is allowed accordingly. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/-