1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO.282/2006. National Insurance Co. Ltd. Diamond Chambers. 2nd Floor, 18th June Road, Panaji-Goa. ......... Appellant. Versus 1. Shri. Pandu @Vishram Narayan Mandrekar, aged 58 years, Residingat H.No.22, Gaonkarwada, Bicholim-Goa. 2. Smt. Vasanti Pandu Mandrekar, aged 56 years, Residing at H. No.22, Gaonkarwada, Bicholim- Goa. 3. Shri. Shrinivas L. Mannawaddar, S/o. Laximan Mannawaddar, R/o. H. No.9, Ramnagar, Dharwad ......... Respondents. Road, Joida Taluka, Uttar Kanara, and Presently residing at C/o Anil Photo Studio, Agarwada, Calangute Bardez- Goa. (Deleted) 4. Shri. Gajanan Shankar Kerkar, R/o. H. No.1280, Umtawado, Calangute, Bardez- Goa. Mr. E.Afonso, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R. S. Sardesai, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 2. Coram :- R. S. MOHITE, J. Date : - 12th October, 2007. ORAL JUDGMENT : Heard both sides. The Advocate for the appellant states 2 that he is giving up all the points except the question of calculation of quantum. He states that admittedly, the salary of the deceased was Rs.5,444/- at the time of accident and death. He points out that the trial Court wrongly calculated the compensation by taking into account income @ Rs.8,000/- per month of the deceased. This amount was arbitrarily increased on the basis of future length of service and future career prospects. He relies upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Bijoy Kumar Dugar Vs. Bidya Dhar Dutta And Others, reported in 2006(3) S.C.C. 242. Wherein, the Apex Court has held that “Dependency would have to be worked on the basis of earnings of deceased at the time of accident and not on the basis of mere assertion of the claimants that he would have earned certain sum in the span of his life time cannot be accepted as legitimate unless all relevant facts are proved by leading cogent and reliable evidence before Tribunal. ” Obviously there can be no evidence as regards the possibility of promotion. In the circumstances, contention is accepted. The compensation is to be calculated on the basis of salary of Rs. 5,444/- per month. Admittedly, the multiplier in this case would be 8. The amount works out to Rs. 3,48,384/-. The compensation payable works out to Rs.3,48,384/- for loss of income, Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/- towards loss of estate. Thus the total compensation awardable would come to Rs.3,52,884 which can be rounded up to Rs. 3,54,000/-. In this view of the matter the appeal is partly allowed and impugned award dated 31.03.2005 partly modified. The appellant is, 3 along with present respondent No.4, held jointly and severally liable to pay compensation in the amount of Rs. 3,54,000/- which shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of application till payment. The amount if any awarded to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 U/s.140 of the M.V. Act, shall be adjusted against final compensation and apportioned equally between these 2 respondents. Any balance amount if due, shall be deposited in this Court within a period of 3 weeks from today. The registrar is directed to disburse this amount as per this order. Appeal stands disposed off accordingly. There will be no order as to costs. R. S. MOHITE, J. SMA