This appeal challenges the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Sangli, dated 13th August 2015, regarding compensation for the death of a 19-year-old in a motor accident. The Bombay High Court corrected errors in the MACT's judgment, specifically regarding the application of the wrong multiplier based on the age of the deceased's parents rather than the deceased, and the non-consideration of future prospects and filial consortium. The court revised the compensation by applying the correct multiplier of 18 and adjusting the deceased's income to Rs. 4,000 per month based on a reasonable assessment of his daily wages.

1. Background

The First Appeal was filed by the next of kin of Sagar Gavade, a 19-year-old who died in a motor accident. The appeal sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the MACT, which initially granted a sum of Rs. 2,54,000. The respondents, including the insurance company, did not challenge the MACT's decision, thereby accepting liability.

2. Grounds of Appeal

The appellants contended that:

• Incorrect Multiplier: The MACT erred by applying a multiplier of 13 based on the age of the deceased's parents instead of applying a multiplier of 18 based on the age of the deceased, as per the Supreme Court's guidelines in the Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation case.
• Non-Consideration of Future Prospects and Filial Consortium: The MACT did not account for future prospects and consortium, which are essential in computing compensation.
• Employment and Income Disregarded: The MACT wrongfully disregarded the deceased's employment and daily wage of Rs. 200, citing the employer's non-compliance with labor laws.

3. Court's Analysis and Decision

The Bombay High Court, after reviewing the evidence and legal precedents, concluded that:

• Correct Multiplier: The correct multiplier of 18 should have been applied as per the deceased’s age.
• Future Prospects: Future prospects should have been considered, increasing the compensation amount.
• Employment Acknowledgment: The court accepted the deceased's employment at a daily wage of Rs. 200, reducing the notional income of Rs. 3,000 per month to a more reasonable Rs. 4,000, considering non-attendance days.

4. Revised Compensation

The Court revised the compensation as follows:

• Base Income: Rs. 4,000 per month.
• Annual Income: Rs. 48,000.
• Multiplier: 18.
• Future Prospects: An additional 50% of the base income was allowed.

5. Conclusion

The appeal was allowed in part, enhancing the compensation by correctly applying the multiplier based on the deceased's age and considering future prospects and actual earnings. The judgment emphasizes the importance of accurate application of legal principles in compensation cases under the Motor Vehicles Act.