The High Court accepted the income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. According to us, the income assessed by the High Court is on the lower, side. The accident happened on 02.01.2001. The Tribunal and the High Court held that no proof of income has been produced to show that the deceased was alleged to be a carpenter. We fail to understand what proof a carpenter can lead except, to lead oral evidence. {Para 2}
3. Keeping in view the fact that the accident took place in 2001 and the deceased was a carpenter, it would not be unjustified to assess his income at Rs. 200/- per day. It is true that carpenter may not get. Work every day, hence, we assess the income at Rs. 5000/- per month.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 7004/2019
Decided On: 04.09.2019
Chameli Devi and Ors. Vs. Jivrail Mian and Ors.
Hon’ble Judges/Coram:
Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Citation: 2019 ACJ 3011,MANU/SC/1528/2019
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,250/- per month but since no positive proof of Income was led, the income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum was taken as notional income. This obviously is not a correct position-of law. The High Court accepted the income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. According to us, the income assessed by the High Court is on the lower, side. The accident happened on 02.01.2001. The Tribunal and the High Court held that no proof of income has been produced to show that the deceased was alleged to be a carpenter. We fail to understand what proof a carpenter can lead except, to lead oral evidence.
3. Keeping in view the fact that the accident took place in 2001 and the deceased was a carpenter, it would not be unjustified to assess his income at Rs. 200/- per day. It is true that carpenter may not get. Work every day, hence, we assess the income at Rs. 5000/- per month. Adding 40% for future prospects i.e. Rs. 2,000/-, the total income works out to Rs. 7,000/-. Deducting 1/5 for personal expenses, keeping in view a large number of dependents, the datum figure comes out to Rs. 5,600/- per month or Rs. 67,200/- per year Applying multiplier of 16, the compensation works out to Rs. 10,75,200/-. Rs. 70,000/- is added towards other non-conventional heads as laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Ors. MANU/SC/1366/2017 : (2017) 16 SCC 680. The total compensation comes out to Rs. 11,45,200/-.
4. The deceased had suffered injuries and it has been proved that Rs. 1,25,000/- were spent on his treatment before his death and Rs. 50,000/- were awarded for his mental agony. As far as mental agony is concerned that unfortunately cannot be granted to the legal heirs and the petition was filed after the death of the deceased. Keeping in view of the fact that the deceased underwent treatment in Delhi for almost one year and he had to be transported from Jharkhand to Delhi and back, we feel that the amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- is on the lower side since it only takes into consideration the actual expenses spent on the injured. There would have been at least one attendant for which expenditure taken at Rs. 2,00/- per day, would amount to Rs. 6,000/- per month. We award an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- for treatment at Delhi. The total compensation is accordingly assessed at Rs. 13,45,200/- which is rounded off to Rs. 13,46,000/-.
5. In view of the above discussion, the amount awarded is enhanced to Rs. 13,46,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim till the payment of the amount. It is ordered accordingly. The amount already paid shall be adjusted and the balance amount be paid to the Appellants or be deposited before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
6. The civil appeal stands disposed of. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.