Yogesh vs Santosh and Others

Uma Nath Singh, J.—In this FAO by the owner of the vehicle against an award dated 4.9.2006 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani, in MACT Petition No. 15 of 2003, awarding a sum of Rs. 3,79,600, with 7% interest from the date of institution of the application, learned Counsel submitted that the deceased was found to be an agriculturist and the Tribunal has put him in the category of a skilled labourer but as a result of non-application of mind his income has been assessed as that of a casual labourer and that too on higher side. Learned Counsel thus submitted that contradictorily the deceased has been assessed as a skilled labourer so also as a casual labourer.

The vital question for adjudication may not be as to whether the deceased was a skilled labourer or a casual labourer as his income has been assessed only at Rs. 1,800 per month, which appears to be rather on lower side, looking to the judgment of Hon''ble the Apex Court in assessing the monthly income of a casual labourer, which varies between Rs. 2,100 and Rs. 2,500. Thus, the appellant should not have any grievance on that count. The compensation amount is thus not on higher side and the interest of 7% per annum is also reasonable in view of a latest judgments of Hon''ble the Apex Court reported in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. S. Rajapriya and Others,

Under the circumstances, we do not find any merit in this appeal. Hence, it is dismissed in limine.