Enhanced compensation cannot be based on claimed income unsupported by cogent evidence.

Narayan Prasad Chandra died from injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 27 September 2024.

His widow and son claimed that he worked as a mason and earned Rs.15,000 per month.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed his monthly income at Rs.10,380, applying the minimum wage prescribed for an unskilled labourer, and awarded compensation of Rs.14,82,500.

The claimants appealed, seeking enhancement on the basis of the higher asserted income.

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in assessing the deceased’s monthly income at Rs.10,380 rather than Rs.15,000

2. Whether the compensation award warranted enhancement or other interference by the High Court

The Court applied the evidentiary principle that a claimed income must be supported by cogent and reliable evidence before it can be accepted in assessing compensation.

Where the asserted earnings are not established, the applicable minimum-wage notification may provide a basis for determining income.

The Court referred to the Labour Department’s minimum-wage notification, under which the prescribed wage for an unskilled labourer at the relevant time was Rs.10,380 per month.

No statute or precedent was cited.

The claimants asserted that the deceased was a mason earning Rs.15,000 per month, but produced no cogent and reliable evidence establishing either his occupation-based earnings or income above the minimum-wage figure.

In the absence of such evidence, the Tribunal was entitled to rely on the relevant minimum wage of Rs.10,380 per month.

The High Court found the Tribunal’s assessment and resulting award fair and proper, with no legal or factual infirmity warranting interference.

It dismissed the appeal and made no order as to costs.