Vouchers and eyewitness testimony are sufficient evidence to establish deceased's income beyond minimum wage standards.

The Appellant Insurance Company challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) Award dated 14th October 2024

The MACT had awarded compensation of Rs. 28,90,300 to the respondents (legal heirs of the deceased) for a motor accident

However, in its final computation, the MACT added interest to the principal and then erroneously directed 9% interest to be paid on that combined sum (effectively interest on interest)

Additionally, the Appellant challenged the assessment of the deceased's monthly income at Rs. 15,000, arguing it should have been based on minimum wages

Whether the MACT erred in its calculation by applying interest on a sum that already included interest component?

Whether the evidence on record was sufficient to sustain a finding of a monthly income of Rs. 15,000 for the deceased?

The court applied principles governing the computation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically regarding the determination of "just compensation" based on proven income rather than minimum wages when robust evidence is available

It also applied the principle that interest is typically calculated on the principal compensation amount from the date of filing the petition until realization to avoid double computation or interest-on-interest

Regarding the calculation error, the Court found that the MACT’s paragraph 35 created confusion by stating a total of Rs. 47,58,821 (Principal + Interest) was subject to further 9% interest; the Court clarified that interest must only be calculated on the principal sum of Rs. 28,90,300

Regarding income, the Court reviewed the testimony of PW-3 (the widow) and PW-4 (the employer/proprietor of S.K. Tailors)

The evidence established that the deceased was a skilled "tailor master/karigar"

The Court specifically relied on salary voucher receipts (Ex. PW-2/1) which showed a salary increase from Rs. 12,000 to Rs. 15,000

The Court concluded that since the testimony remained unshaken during cross-examination and was supported by documentary evidence, the benchmark of Rs. 15,000 was "robust, substantial and sufficient"

It held that the compensation of Rs. 28,90,300 shall bear interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing until realization, dismissing the calculation in paragraph 33 of the original award

The Court upheld the MACT’s assessment of the deceased's income at Rs. 15,000 per month

The appeal was disposed of, and the statutory deposit was ordered to be refunded to the Appellant