1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL No.276/1998 SMT. SAROJ & Ors. V/S RAFEEQ MOHAMAD & Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT : MARCH 14, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Shri Mahendra Goyal,for claimants-appellants. Shri A.K. Bhandari, Sr. Adv., with Shri Rizwan Ahmed, for M/s United India Insurance Company Ltd. BY THE COURT : (Oral) 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') has been preferred by the dependents of deceased Bhanwar Lal for enhancement of the claim against judgment dated February 5, 1998, passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short “the Tribunal”) whereby a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- by way of compensation was awarded. 2. On January 16, 1995 at about 7.00 p.m. deceased Bhanwar Lal was going from his house by scooter to Govindpuri, Sodala and as he reached on Hawa Sarak, Jaipur, a Tempo RNP 2562 driven by respondent No.1, driver of the offending vehicle dashed against Bhanwar Lal 2 causing injuries which ultimately resulted in his death in Sawai Man Singh Hospital on 21.1.1995. 3. Learned counsel for the claimants appellants submits that the learned Tribunal failed to consider the future prospects of the deceased as he could reach to the post of Office Superintendent had he been alive, apart from getting selection scales on completion of service of 9, 18 and 27 years as applicable to the employees of the State. It was further contended that the deceased would have been entitled to revision of pay and allowance as per the recommendation of the successive Pay Commissions from time to time so as to off-set the effect of escalation of cost of living so as to take care of the diminishing purchasing power of the rupee. In this regard, the learned counsel relied on in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v/s Susamma Thomas (Mrs) and Others (1994) SCC 176) in support of his arguments. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company supported the judgment of the leaned Tribunal on the ground that the learned Tribunal arrived at the conclusion in awarding the compensation on the basis 3 evidence led by the two parties during the enquiry and the compensation awarded is adequate and calls for no interference. 5. In Susamma Thomas's case (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court had an occasion to consider the future prospects of advancement in life and career in terms of money to augment multiplicand while awarding the compensation and made the higher estimate of monthly income of the deceased employee as under : “In the present case the deceased was 39 years of age. His income was Rs. 1032/- per month. Of course, the future prospects of advancement in life and career should also be sounded in terms of money to augment the multiplicand. While the chance of the multiplier is determined by two factors, namely, the rate of interest appropriate to a stable economy and the age of the deceased or of the claimant whichever is higher, the ascertainment of the multiplicand is a more difficult exercise. Indeed, many factors have to be put into the scales to evaluate the contingencies of the future. All contingencies of the future need not necessarily be baneful. The deceased person in this case had a more or less stable job. It will not be inappropriate to take a reasonably liberal view of the prospects of the future and in estimating the gross income it will be unreasonable to estimate the loss of dependency on the present actual income of Rs. 4 1032/- per month. We think, having regard to the prospects of advancement in the future career, respecting which there is evidence on record, we will not be in error in making a higher estimate of monthly income at Rs. 2000/- as the gross income.” 6. In the instant case, it is revealed that deceased Bhanwar Lal was an employee in Government department and died at a young age of 36 years and was getting Rs.3091/- at the time of his death and his stable income was found to be Rs.3091/- per month and after deducting the amount to be spent on the deceased himself, the total amount of dependency was found to be Rs.2400/- per month. The learned Tribunal accordingly computed Rs.4,03,200/- on adopting a multiplier of 14. In this regard, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the amount of monthly income of the deceased be doubled so as to off-set the factor of future prospects of the deceased as well as the other factors as was done by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Susamma Thopmas's case (supra). In the totality of the facts and having regard to the advancement in future career of the deceased as well as the number of dependents 5 left by the deceased, it is deemed proper to increase the amount of annual dependency of the deceased by 30% so as to enhance the total amount of compensation by Rs.1,21,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 7. Accordingly, the amount of the award of death claim of Bhanwar Lal is enhanced from Rs.4,50,000/- to Rs.5,71,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of appeal i.e. 5.3.1998 with the condition that failure to make payment under the award within a period of three months from this order shall entail interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of appeal. The appeal stands disposed of with the modification in the award as stated hereinabove. (Guman Singh),J. Chauhan/