S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.50/2007. (Smt. Geeta Devi & Ors. Vs. Prem Prakash & Ors. ) Date of Order :: 8th January 2007. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. Vipin Mankad for Mr. Sanjay Mathur, for the appellants. …. By way of this appeal against the award dated 19.04.2006 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hanumangarh, the claimants, wife, four children and mother of about 41 years old vehicular accident victim Vishnudas seek enhancement over the amount of Rs.6,37,520/- awarded towards compensation. For quantification of compensation the Tribunal has noticed the facts that the victim was earning from his saw-mill; that the fatal accident in question occurred on 31.10.2003 and prior to it, on 06.08.2003, the deceased had shown his annual income at Rs.94,700/- in the tax return filed in relation to the accounting year 2002-2003 (Ex.45A); and that for the year 2004-2005, wife of the deceased has shown the income from the said saw-mill of the deceased at Rs.69,598/- earned after employing a Manager. The assertion of payment of salary to 1 the said Manager at Rs.6,000/- per month has not been accepted correct and the same has been taken at Rs.3,000/- per month. The Tribunal has taken the difference of Rs. 25,102/- between the annual income as lastly shown by the deceased at Rs. 94,700/- and as later on shown by his wife at Rs. 69,598/-towards loss for the claimants; and to this amount of Rs. 25,102/- the Tribunal has added Rs.36,000/- of the salary of Manager required to be employed; and thus has taken total loss for the claimants at Rs.61,102/- per annum; and then, while deducting one-third on personal expenditure of the deceased and with application of multiplier of 15, has assessed pecuniary loss at Rs.6,11,020/-. The Tribunal has further allowed Rs.20,000/- towards non-pecuniary loss, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.1,500/- towards costs of litigation and in this manner has made total award in the sum of Rs. 6,37,520/- in favour of the claimants. The method of assessment of loss as adopted by the Tribunal though appears to be of a circuitous route, the fundamental fact remains that the deceased was earning from business establishment of his saw-mill and his last income was shown at Rs.94,700/- per annum. By its very nature, a part of the business income usually retains itself to the family of the deceased; and in the present case the income tax return 2 Ex.49-A filed by the wife of the deceased shows her having earned Rs.69,598/- from the same saw-mill. A reasonable component of loss related with skill, labour, management and supervision of the deceased could have been taken into consideration for the purpose of assessment of pecuniary loss of the claimants. Though the Tribunal has not accepted payment of salary to the Manager at Rs.6,000/- per month but even addition of Rs.3,000/- of his salary towards assessment of pecuniary loss in this case appears to be rather on the higher side. With the method of calculation as adopted, ultimately the loss of income has been taken by the Tribunal at Rs.61,102/- per annum; and thereby loss of contribution to the claimants after deduction of one-third on personal expenditure of the deceased at Rs.40,734/- per annum. Assessment of such multiplicand in the present case cannot be said to be low or inadequate; and rather appears a bit excessive. The Tribunal has applied maximum side multiplier of 15 though in the overall circumstances of the case, the Tribunal could have considered application of multiplier lower than 15. In the ultimate analysis, the award as made by the Tribunal in the sum of Rs.6,37,520/- in favour of the claimants 3 cannot be said to be falling short of just compensation admissible in this case and rules out any scope for enhancement. The appeal fails and is, therefore, dismissed summarily. [DINESH MAHESHWARI], J. Mohan/ 4