N.K. Mody, J:
1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 22-10 2008 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ratlam in claim case No. 23/2008. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of 3,24.000/- with interest to the claimants for the death of one Mangal, who died in vehicle accident. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, need to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and if so to what extent'
2. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that all these findings are recorded in favour of claimant by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in Claimant's favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.
3. As observed supra, it is a death case. Break-up of the amount awarded is as under:
towards loss of dependency 3,12,000/-
towards loss of love and affection 10,000/-
towards loss of funeral expenses 2.000/-
Total 3,24,000/-
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in a motor accident which took place on 11-5-2007 one Mangal aged 20 years died. It is submitted that for assessing the loss of dependency, learned tribunal assessed the income @ 3,000/- per month and after deducting l/3rd amount towards personal expenses, applied the multiplier of 13. It is submitted that the income assessed is on lower side while documentary evidence on record which shows the deceased was running tea-stall and his income ought to have been assessed @ 5,000/- per month and multiplier of 13 has wrongly applied keeping in view the age of the appellant No. 1, while the appellant No. 1 was not found depend on deceased. It is submitted that income of the deceased has been assessed on lower side and on other he (sic) is also the same awarded is on lower side and deduction of 3rd amount towards personal expenses is on higher side. It is prayed that appeal be allowed and amount be enhanced.
5. Learned counsel for respondent/insurance company submits that the deceased was bachelor and deduction of l/3rd amount is on higher side. Multiplier of 13 has wrongly been applied and amount awarded is already on higher side. It is submitted that amount awarded is just and proper and no case of further enhancement is made out. Cross-objection has also been filed and it is prayed that appeal be dismissed and cross-objection be allowed.
6. After taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that since accident is of the year 2007, therefore, the income ought to have been assessed @ 3,500/- per month and instead of deducting l/3rd amount, 1/2 amount ought to have been deducted towards personal expenses as the deceased was bachelor and multiplier of 16 ought to have been applied. Keeping in view the age of the deceased, appellants are entitled for the following amount :
towards loss of dependency 3,36,000/-
towards funeral expenses 5.000/-
towards loss of love and affection 10,000/-
towards loss of estate 5,000/-
________________
Total 3.56.000/-
________________
Thus, appellants are entitled for a sum of 3,56,000/- instead of 3,24,000/-. The enhanced amount of 32,000/- shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of application.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the appeal stands disposed of.
Appeal dismissed.