JUDGMENT
A.M. Sapre, J.
1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants, who are legal representatives of the deceased under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 24.12.2004 passed by learned Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhar in Claim Case No. 11 of 2003. By impugned award the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,55,500 with interest to the claimants for death of one Bharat Singh, who died in the vehicular accident. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on a lower side and hence, it needs to be enhanced. It is for claiming enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is, whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence is made out in the compensation awarded and if so to what extent?
2. Heard Mr. Manish Jain, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. H.G. Shukla, learned counsel for the insurance company, respondent No. 3.
3. 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 firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of the claimant by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants’ favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter, we do not wish to burden our judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.
4. As observed supra, it is a death case. On 19.2.2003, Bharat Singh, aged around 26 years, a driver by occupation, met with a motor accident and died, giving rise to filing of claim petition by his legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 2,55,500. It was held that deceased’s monthly income was Rs. 2,000. Applying the multiplier of 15 and working out the dependency by applying the usual ratio of 1/3rd and 2/3rd, the Tribunal worked out the compensation to Rs. 2,43,000 payable to claimants. In addition, Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 12,500 towards conventional heads thereby making a total sum of Rs. 2,55,500 as compensation to the claimants for the death of Bharat Singh. It is against this determination, the claimants have filed this appeal contending, inter alia, that compensation awarded to claimants is on lower side and hence, it be enhanced.
5. We have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimants. In our view, the Tribunal should have made Rs. 4,000 to be the basis for calculating the compensation payable to the claimants. It is for the reason because claimants have filed a salary certificate, Exh. P14, issued by one transport contractor by name-New Capital Freight Carriers, Indore, mentioning therein that the deceased was a driver working in his organization drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 4,000. This certificate was also proved by the claimants by examining Sumeet Agrawal, PW 2, i.e., owner of the concern (employer). What more proof is called for to hold that deceased’s monthly salary was Rs. 4,000. We thus have no hesitation in holding that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 4,000 and hence, it is this amount which should have been taken as basis for calculating the compensation payable to the claimants.
6. In this view of the matter, we take Rs. 3,500 as dependency figure for a month and Rs. 3,500 x 12 = Rs. 42,000 for a year. We then apply the multiplier of 17 and get a sum of Rs. 42,000 x 17 = Rs. 7,14,000. In addition, a sum of Rs. 12,500 already awarded to the claimants by Claims Tribunal towards conventional heads, makes a total compensation of Rs. 7,14,000 + Rs. 12,500 = Rs. 7,26,500 payable to the claimants.
7. In other words, claimants are held entitled for a total sum of Rs. 7,26,500 by way of compensation for the death of Bharat Singh.
8. The compensation awarded to the claimants is a just, reasonable and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in these types of cases. Indeed in such cases, no fixed and any static formula is provided for determining the compensation and the same is required to be determined on the basis of evidence adduced and the relevant factors mentioned supra. It is on this basis, the courts have to work out award of reasonable compensation.
9. Learned Counsel for the appellants has cited some authorities for claiming enhancement. We have gone through these authorities. In our opinion and as observed supra, every case depends upon facts of each case and one can rely upon the cases for awarding compensation.
10. In this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. The enhanced sum will carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, from the date of application till realization. All other findings are upheld being not under challenge.
Counsel’s fee Rs. 1,500, if certified.