IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.547 of 2004 BRANCH MANAGER,ORIENTAL INSURA Versus MOST.NIRMALA DEVI & ORS ----------- 6 23.04.2010 Heard the learned counsel Sri Ashok Priyadarshi on behalf of the appellant and the learned counsel Sri Ajay Kumar Tiwari on behalf of the respondents/claimants. This Misc. Appeal has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company against the judgment dated 23.08.2004 and award dated 04.09.2004 passed by the Motor Vehicles Claim Tribunal-cum-IXth Additional District Judge, Saran in Claim Case No. 86 of 2002/20 of 2003 whereby the learned Tribunal allowed the compensation to the extent of Rs 4,39,000/- and the appellant was directed to pay the same. The claimants/respondents filed the aforesaid claim case alleging that late Surendra Mahto died in an accident caused by the Trekker No. BPL-0411. The said trekker was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company, Patna. Claimants are widow and minor children of the deceased, Surendra Mahto. After trial, the learned court below came to the conclusion that the monthly income of the deceased was of Rs 3,000/-. It appears that the learned court below came to this conclusion on the basis of minimum wage and 2 therefore, after deducting 1/3rd, the total sum for the income per year was multiplied by 18. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in the schedule, the notional income has been mentioned as Rs 1500/- and, therefore, the learned court below has erred in finding that the notional income of the deceased was at Rs 3,000/- per month. Except this contention, no other point has been raised by the appellant. It has now been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the notional income of Rs 1500/- per year was mentioned in 1994 and now at this stage, after such a long time, he cannot be said that the said amount will be the income per year. The minimum wage of a person for pay has been fixed at more than Rs 100 per day. Moreover, the schedule-II where the multiplier has been given is only a guideline. The Tribunal has to give just compensation and while calculating the said just compensation, the learned Tribunal has considered that the deceased was a driver of heavy transport vehicle and, therefore, fixed monthly income at Rs 3,000/- per month. I find no reason to interfere with the said finding. However, it appears that instead of granting 6 per cent interest, 8 per cent interest has been granted. In my opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the case, if 6 per 3 cent interest is granted, it will suffice the purpose. Accordingly, I direct the award amount will carry 6 per cent interest per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent stated above only. The statutory amount of Rs 25,000/- deposited by the appellant before this court is also directed to be paid to the respondents/appellants on proper identification. In the result, this Misc. Appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. akv/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)