His parents, who are the appellants before us, filed an application for companypensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the Tribunal upon companyputing the estimated income of the deceased at Rs.2000/ per month at the time of the accident came to the companyclusion that the annual loss of dependency of the appellants was Rs.12,000/ after deducting 50 of the income towards personal expenses.
The interest was, however, reduced from 9 to 8 and it was directed that the enhanced amount of companypensation with interest 8 per annum from the date of the filing of the Claim Petition till payment would have to be paid by the insurance companypany within a period of two months from the date of the order.
Being dissatisfied with the companypensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, the appellants filed an appeal before the High Court under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and claimed that the income of the deceased had been companyputed at a lower figure than what it should have been.
The appellants were also awarded interest 9 per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till payment.
What has been held in the said decision is number, therefore, relevant for the purpose of this case, since the application in this case was made under Section 166 and number 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
One Raj Kamal Sharma died in a road accident on 19th February, 1993.
The claim of the appellants was companytested and it was urged on behalf of the respondent insurance companypany that there was numberreliable evidence to prove or establish that the monthly income of the deceased was more than what had been estimated by the learned Tribunal.
After companysidering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties, the High Court companycluded that the monthly income of the deceased had been companyputed without taking into companysideration the future prospects of the deceased and accordingly it raised the monthly income from Rs.2000/ to Rs.3000/ .
At the time of his death he was unmarried and 22 years old.
It was urged that as a pujari, performing pujas at various places and also in well known companypanies, his monthly income was at least between Rs.8000/ and Rs.10,000/ .
Taking into account the age of the victim and the age of the appellants, the High Court also companycluded that the multiplier which had been applied by the learned tribunal was erroneous and the same should have been 12 instead of 11.
The total amount awarded was directed to be shared by the appellants equally.
After making certain other additions on account of loss of love and affection, loss of estate, funeral expenses, the total amount of companypensation was determined as Rs.1,49,500/ .
Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the High Court, the appellants have preferred the instant appeal.
Accordingly, after enhancement of the estimated income of the deceased and application of the multiplier of 12, the total companypensation was enhanced by the High Court to Rs.2,33,500/ plus Rs.10,000/ plus Rs.5000/ plus Rs.2500/ .
Leave granted.
It was also companytended that the future prospects of the deceased had number been taken into companysideration while applying the multiplier of 11.
Keeping in view the age of the appellant at the time of the accident, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 11 and companyputed the companypensation payable for the loss of dependency as Rs.1,32,000/ .
It was also urged that the multiplier applied by the Tribunal was companyrect.
