1. This appeal has been preferred for enhancement of compensation awarded vide judgment and award under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, dated 31.01.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nadiad in M.A.C.P. No. 142/2005 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and the appellants, original claimants, were awarded total compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs.
2. The facts in brief are that on 04.04.2005, while the deceased-Jayshriben was going as pillion rider on Motorbike No.GJ-6-AE-2546 and at that time, one truck No.GJ-6-U-8398, driven by original opponent No.1 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the motorcycle. As a result, the deceased was fallen down on the road and sustained serious injuries and died on the same day. Therefore, original claimants filed claim petition before the Tribunal, which came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that the Tribunal has erred in assessing annual income at Rs.15,000/-, even though it was established that the deceased was earning Rs.2,500/- per month. It is further contended that the Tribunal ought to have adopted the mutliplier of 18, instead of 17. However, having gone through the impugned award, I find that salary certificate of the deceased was filed before the Tribunal, which was marked and in support of that salary certificate, the affidavit was produced at Exh.17 by the proprietor of Rami Tution Classes, Baroda, but, the proprietor was not examined before the Tribunal. Therefore, in my view the salary was not established and therefore, the Tribunal was justified in considering notional income i.e.Rs.15,000/- p.a. Further, as the decased was aged about 25 years at the time of accident, therefore, the Tribunal was also justified in adopting the multiplier of 17. The compensation awarded under the respective heads are just and appropriate and in consonance with the evidence on record and the law on the subject. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal and hence, I find no reasons to entertain the present appeal.
4. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
..mitesh..
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]