L.S. Panta JUDGMENT
R.V. Raveendran, J.
1. The claimants in a motor accident claim have filed this appeal by special leave seeking increase in compensation.
2. One Rajinder Prakash died on account of injuries sustained in a motor accident which occurred on 18.4.1988 involving a bus bearing No. DLP 829 belonging to the Delhi Transport Corporation. At the time of the accident and untimely death, the deceased was aged 38 years, and was working as a Scientist in the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) on a monthly salary of Rs. 3402/- and other benefits. His widow, three minor children, parents and grandfather (who is no more) filed a claim for Rs. 16 lakhs before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, New Delhi. An officer of ICAR, examined as PW-4, gave evidence that the age of retirement in the service of ICAR was 60 years and the salary received by the deceased at the time of his death was Rs. 4004/- per month.
3. The Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 6.8.1993 allowed the claim in part. The Tribunal calculated the compensation by taking the monthly salary of the deceased as Rs. 3402. It deducted one-third towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, and arrived at the contribution to the family as Rs. 2250 per month (or Rs. 27,000/- per annum). In view of the evidence that the age of retirement was 60 years, it held that the period of service lost on account of the untimely death was 22 years. Therefore it applied the multiplier of 22 and arrived at the loss of dependency to the family as Rs. 5,94,000/-. It awarded the said amount with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. After deducting Rs. 15000/- paid as interim compensation, it apportioned the balance compensation among the claimants, that is, Rs. 3,00,000/- to the widow, Rs. 75000/- to each of the two daughters, Rs. 50000/- to the son, Rs. 19000/- to the grandfather and Rs. 30000/- to each of the parents.
4. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the appellants filed an appeal. The Delhi High Court by its judgment dated 15.2.2007 allowed the said appeal in part. The High Court was of the view that though in the claim petition the pay was mentioned as Rs. 3,402 plus other benefits, the pay should be taken as Rs. 4,004/- per month as per the evidence of PW-4. Having regard to the fact that the deceased had 22 years of service left at the time of death and would have earned annual increments and pay revisions during that period, it held that the salary would have at least doubled (Rs. 8008/- per month) by the time he retired. It therefore determined the income of the deceased as Rs. 6006/- per month, being the average of Rs. 4,004/- (salary which he was getting at the time of death) and Rs. 8,008/- (salary which he would have received at the time of retirement). Having regard to the large number of members in the family, the High Court was of the view that only one fourth should be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, instead of the standard one-third deduction. After such deduction, it arrived at the contribution to the family as Rs. 4,504/- per month or Rs. 54,048/- per annum. Having regard to the age of the deceased, the High Court ch........