Compensation enhanced by revising notional income while excluding earning parents from consortium awards.

The appeals arise from a motor accident involving a 23-year-old deceased individual who earned a living through private tuitions, video shooting, and photography.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Dhamtari, passed an award on 15.03.2019, granting ₹7,10,400/- in compensation to the claimants.

The claimants (Appellants in MAC No. 1229/2019) sought enhancement of the award, contending the notional income of ₹4,500/- was insufficient given the deceased's professional activities.

The Insurance Company (Appellant in MAC No. 1249/2019) sought to set aside the award or be exonerated, arguing that the parents (Appellants No. 1 & 2) were earning members and thus not "dependents".

1. Whether the notional income of the deceased as assessed by the Claims Tribunal was adequate given his age and occupations.

2. Whether the parents of the deceased, being earning members, are entitled to compensation for loss of consortium.

3. Whether the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal requires enhancement or modification.

The court primarily relied on the principles laid down in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. regarding the assessment of dependency, multiplier application, and deductions for personal expenses.

It applied the standard of adding 40% for future prospects for a deceased individual aged below 40 years and a 50% (1/2) deduction for personal expenses for a bachelor.

The court also adhered to the principle that earning parents may be excluded from certain heads of compensation like consortium if they are not financially dependent.

The High Court examined the income claims, noting that the deceased was a 23-year-old professional involved in tuition and photography. While the claimants sought a notional income of ₹25,000/-, the Court found it appropriate to increase the Tribunal's assessment from ₹4,500/- to ₹8,060/-.

Applying the Sarla Verma guidelines, the Court added 40% for future prospects and deducted 50% for personal expenses as the deceased was single. A multiplier of 18 was applied based on the age.

Regarding the Insurance Company’s contention on dependency, the Court held that since Appellants No. 1 and 2 (parents) were earning members, they were not entitled to claim for consortium; however, the other three claimants (siblings/relatives contributing to the family) justified the overall claim for dependency and consortium for themselves.

The claimants are entitled to an additional amount of ₹6,88,272/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until realization. The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the additional amount within three months. All other conditions of the original award remained intact.