A 30% addition for future prospects applies to deceased permanent employees aged between 40 and 50 years.

Smt. Poonam Devi died after being hit by car no. D.L.4C-A.D./7643 on 05.12.2015 while standing on the left side of the road.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the car’s driver and that the deceased had no contributory negligence.

The vehicle was found to be duly insured with Reliance General Insurance Company, and the driver possessed a valid driving licence and other necessary documents.

By award dated 29.09.2018, the Tribunal awarded ₹28,33,850 with interest at 6% against the insurer.

The insurer challenged the award, principally disputing the determination of income and the addition towards future prospects.

Whether the Tribunal improperly determined the deceased’s income at ₹19,850 per month.

Whether the Tribunal erred in granting a 30% addition to the deceased’s income towards future prospects.

The Court applied the principles governing computation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, including the method of assessing the deceased’s actual income after permissible deductions.

It relied on Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, for the structured assessment of compensation.

It further applied National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, particularly paragraph 59.3, under which future prospects are added at 30% where the deceased was in permanent employment and aged between 40 and 50 years; “actual salary” is to be read as salary after deduction of tax.

The Court found that the Tribunal’s determination of ₹19,850 as the deceased’s monthly income was based on salary documents and followed the necessary deductions.

Since the assessment was supported by documentary evidence and the insurer failed to demonstrate any legally sustainable alternative calculation, the Court declined to interfere with it.

On future prospects, the deceased was stated to be aged 49 years and 2 months at the time of the accident.

Applying paragraph 59.3 of Pranay Sethi, the Court held that a 30% addition was legally applicable to a deceased aged between 40 and 50 years and that the Tribunal had correctly applied the governing precedent.

The insurer was directed to deposit the balance amount, after adjustment of any amount already deposited, with the concerned Tribunal within 45 days.

The Registry was directed to transmit the statutory deposit of ₹25,000 to the Tribunal, and the original record was ordered to be sent back.