Rajesh Bindal JUDGMENT
Rajesh Bindal, J.
1. Aggrieved against the judgment1 of the High Court2, vide which the compensation awarded to the Appellants (claimants) by the Tribunal3 was reduced, the present appeal has been preferred.
2. Briefly, the facts are that Ravisankar, aged 52 years, met with an accident on 09.12.2012, at about 8.30 P.M. while driving TVS Starcity bearing registration No. TN-72-AV-0927, which was insured with Respondent No. 1-Insurance Company. FIR No. 442 dated 10.12.2012 was registered at Police Station Kalakkaadu, District Tirunelveli. A claim petition4 was filed by the dependants of the deceased claiming compensation of ` 1,00,00,000/-. It was pleaded that the deceased was doing multiple activities. Besides being an agriculturist growing bananas, coconuts and paddy, he was also running a dairy farm and was a Government contractor. He was the sole bread earner of the family, who left behind his old mother, wife, daughter and son, who are the Appellants before this Court.
3. The accident and the liability of the Insurance Company as such are not in dispute.
4. The only dispute raised in the present appeal is regarding the quantum of compensation to which the Appellants are entitled to.
5. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by the parties, opined that the income of the deceased was ` 50,000/- per month. Applying a cut of 1/4th for his personal expenses and adding 10% for future prospects, assessed total compensation towards loss of income at ` 51,04,550/-. Besides that, ` 15,000/- were awarded towards loss of estate, ` 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and ` 15,000/- for funeral expenses. The total amount of compensation assessed by the Tribunal was ` 51,64,550/-5. Interest @8% per annum was also awarded.
6. Aggrieved against the aforesaid award of the Tribunal, the Insurance Company preferred an appeal before the High Court. The main issue raised was regarding the income of the deceased. Accepting the contentions raised by the Insurance Company, the High Court reduced the income of the deceased from ` 50,000/- to ` 20,000/- per month. After adding 10% towards future prospects, application of 1/4th cut on account of personal expenses and after applying a multiplier of 11, the loss of income was assessed at ` 21,78,000/-. Adding a sum of ` 70,000/- under the conventional heads, compensation of ` 22,48,000/- was awarded. The interest awarded by the Tribunal was not disturbed.
7. Learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the High Court had gone wrong in reducing the amount of income of the deceased from ` 50,000/- to ` 20,000/- per month. There is ample evidence on record to s........