The appeal arises out of a judgment rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Himmatnagar in MACP No.2080 of 1998 on 30/10/2004. The said claim petition was preferred by present respondents No.1 to 5 for accidental death of Narendrakumar Kahyabhai Mochi in an accident, that occurred on 01/12/1998 at about 10:00 a.m. near Vejarpkampa on the road leading to Ranashan from Gambhoi. The deceased was knocked down by tractor bearing No.GJ-9H-5092 driven by respondent No.6 and was owned by respondent No.7 herein. The case of the claimants was that the deceased was aged about 28 years and was earning about Rs.2,500/- per month as a cobbler. 2. The Tribunal assessed the prospective income of the deceased to be Rs.2,700/- and after deducting 1/3rd amount therefrom as an expenditure on self, assessed dependency loss at Rs.1,800/-. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 18 and awarded a compensation of Rs.3,88,000/- to the claimants. The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,800/- towards transport charges, Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- each towards loss of estate, loss of consortium and loss of expectation of life, totalling to Rs.4,23,600/-.
3. Heard learned Advocate for the appellant and learned Advocates for the respondents.
4. Learned Advocate for the appellant has taken this Court through the judgment and the evidence.
According to the learned Advocates, the Tribunal has erred while assessing the prospective income of the deceased and, therefore, the compensation awarded under that head has to be reduced. Further, if paragraph No.13 of the judgment impugned is seen, the Tribunal has applied the formula as held in case of Ritaben Vs. AMTC 2000 ACJ 153. The Tribunal has assessed the income at Rs.1,800/- per month, as against Rs.2,500/- claimed by the claimants and thereafter has added two fold of the said income and thereafter divided the same by two for arriving at for the prospective income and thereafter also the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd therefrom as an expenditure by the deceased on his own self. In the opinion of this Court, as per the law prevailing then the Tribunal cannot be said to have committed any error of law; nor can it be said that the income assessed is on higher side. A cobbler is a skilled craftsman and his income can reasonably be assessed at Rs.1,800/- per month. Under the circumstances, no error can be said to have been committed by the Tribunal in assessing other income or the prospective income of the deceased. Considering the fact that the age of the deceased was 28 years and claimants are the widow of the deceased and three minor children of the deceased, the multiplier of 18 cannot be said to be on a higher side and, therefore, no interference is called for in the assessment made by the Tribunal of compensation under the head of loss of dependency.
5. No other ground is pressed in service in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, devoid of merits and must fail. Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
(A L DAVE, J.) sompura