Case: Kanhsingh  Vs. Tukaram

The necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to determine whether the appellants are entitled for relief as prayed in this appealOn 02.07.2006, Deependra Singh Chouhan, son of the appellants herein, aged 27 years, was driving the motor cycle No.4 along with his friend Ashok Sharma. The aforesaid motor cycle which was being ridden by Deependra met with an accident when it was hit by tanker No.5 driven by Tukaram, respondent No. 1 herein. Deependra Singh succumbed to his injuries during the course of treatment, parents of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jawra, District Ratlam (M.P.) (in short the Tribunal) under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, 1988, for a compensation of Rs.. The Tribunal by its judgment and award partly allowed the Claim Petition by awarding a total sum of Rs.12,10,014/Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the appellants filed Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2918 of 2009 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore. The High Court by its judgment and award dated 23.07.2012 partly allowed the said appeal and disposed of the same with an enhancement of Rs.. Hence, this appeal.

Reasoning: p.m. From the facts, circumstances and evidence on record, it is clear that the deceased was 27 years of age, working with HDFC as the Manager earning Rs.1,81,860/per annum (i.e. Rs.15,155/p.m.) and there were definite chances of his further promotion and consequent increase in salary by way of periodical revision of the salary on the basis of cost of living Index prevalent in the area if he would alive and worked in the bank. Therefore, adding 50% under the head of future prospects to the annual income of the deceased according to the principle laid down in the case of Vimal Kanwar & Ors. (supra), the total loss of income comes to Rs.2,72,790/per annum [Rs. 1,81,860 + (1/2 * Rs.1,81,860)]Deducting 10% tax, net annual income comes to Rs.2,45,511/Deducting 1/3rd [Rs.81,837] towards personal expenses since the claimants are the parents of the deceased, loss of dependency comes to 1,63,674 X 11(appropriate multiplier as per the age of the parent) Rs. 18,00,414/The Tribunal and the High Court have further erred in law in awarding only Rs.2,000/towards funeral expenses instead of Rs.25,000/according to the principles laid down by this Court in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors. [(2013) 9 SCC 54] . Hence, we award Rs.25,000/towards the sameFurther, the Tribunal and the High Court have erred in not following the principles laid down by this Court in M. Mansoor & Anr v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. [2013 (12) SCALE 324] in awarding a meagre sum of just Rs.30,000/under the heads of loss of love and affectionThe Courts below have erred in not granting the interest on compensation at the rate of 9% p.a. as per the principles laid down in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy [(2011)14 SCC 481] . The total compensation payable to the appellants by thee Company will be Rs. 24,25,604/with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the application till the date of payment to the appellants.