JUDGMENT : One Rohit Kumar was a student of Architectural Assistantship Course in Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Government Polytechnic College Ambota, District Una, H.P. His date of birth was 07.05.1995. On 17.09.2015, he was travelling as a pillion rider on the motor cycle alongwith one Vicky. The motor cycle met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving of a car driven by respondent No. 2. Rohit Kumar and Vicky died on the spot. Respondent No. 1 Smt. Inder Kaur-mother of Rohit Kumar preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal vide award dated 24.12.2018 allowed the claim petition. Respondents No. 2 and 3 and the appellant-Insurance Company were held liable for payment of compensation to the extent of 70% with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till deposit. The potential income of the deceased was assessed as Rs.15,000/- per month. On that basis, compensation was determined as Rs.16,36,600/-. The liability of payment of compensation to the extent of 70% was to be discharged by the Insurance Company i.e. the appellant. 2. The appellant-Insurance Company has assailed the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Learned counsel for the appellant confined his submission only on the ground that potential income of the deceased was determined on the higher side by the learned Tribunal. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 3(i) It is not in dispute that the deceased was a student of 3 years course in Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Government Polytechnic College Ambota, District Una, H.P. The deceased was to become a qualified Architectural Assistant by the year 2016. At the time of his death in the fateful accident, he had already completed two years of the said course. Deceased was a student. Thus, in a case of such facts, it is the potential income which had to be ascertained. It will be appropriate at this stage to notice a judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and another 2010 ACJ 2867 (SC). This case pertained to award of compensation to the appellant who had sustained grievous injuries in a road accident. The appellant aged 25 years at the time of the accident was a student of Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical) in B.I.T. institution. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and another 2010 ACJ 2867 (SC). This case pertained to award of compensation to the appellant who had sustained grievous injuries in a road accident. The appellant aged 25 years at the time of the accident was a student of Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical) in B.I.T. institution. The Hon’ble Apex Court noticed that the appellant in his evidence had stated that in the campus interview, he was selected by TATA as well as by Reliance Industry and was offered a pay package of Rs. 3,50,000/- per annum. The Hon’ble Apex Court observed that it can be reasonably assumed that the appellant would have got a good job and accordingly assessed the appellant’s future earning as Rs. 60,000/- per annum. In Lata Wadhwa Vs. State of Bihar 2001 ACJ 1735 (SC), Hon’ble Apex Court awarded compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the parents of children who were students of 4th, 5th and 6th classes. In Radhakrishna and another Vs. Gokul and others 2013 ACJ 2860 (SC), the deceased was 19 years old and student of Engineering course. The Tribunal determined the compensation by taking his annual income as Rs. 15,000/-. After noticing the above two judgments, the Hon’ble Apex Court held the appellants therein entitled to compensation of Rs. 7,00,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum. It will also be appropriate to refer to 2019 ACJ 1291 (SC), titled M.R. Krishna Murthi Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and others, wherein after considering various precedents including the judgment rendered in Arvind Kumar Mishra (supra), the Hon’ble Court culled out following principles for assessing the compensation :- “(i) In those cases where the victim of the accident is not an earning person but a student, while assessing the compensation for loss of future earning, the focus of the examination would be the career prospect and the likely earning of such a person in future. For example, where the claimant is pursuing a particular professional course, the poser would be: what would have been his income had he joined a service commensurating with the said course. That can be the future earning. (ii) There may be cases where the victim is not, at that stage, doing any such course to get a particular job. He or she may be studying in a school. That can be the future earning. (ii) There may be cases where the victim is not, at that stage, doing any such course to get a particular job. He or she may be studying in a school. In such a case, future career would depend upon multiple factors like the family background, choice/interest of the complainant to pursue a particular career, facilities available to him/her for adopting such a career, the favourable surrounding circumstances to see which would have enabled the claimant to successfully pick up the said career etc. If the chosen field is employment, then the future earning can be taken on the basis of salary and allowances which are payable for such calling. In case, career is a particular profession, the future earning would depend on host of other factors on the basis of which chances to achieve success in such a profession can be ascertained. (iii) There may be cases like Deo Patodi where even a student, the claimant would have made earnings on part-time basis or would have received offer for a particular job. In such cases, these factors would also assume relevance. (iv) After ascertaining the likely earning of the victim in the aforesaid manner, the nature of injuries and disability suffered as a result thereof would be kept in mind while determining as to how much earning has been affected thereby. Here, impact of injuries on functional disability is to be seen. In case of death of victim, it would result in total loss of earning. In the case of injuries, the nature of disability becomes important. Such an exercise was undertaken in N. Manjegowda case {(1014 ACJ 617 (SC)}.” 3(ii) In the instant case, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has determined the potential income of the deceased at Rs. 15,000/- per month. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Arvind Mishra’s case (supra) had determined the potential income of the injured student at Rs. 5,000/- per month in the year 2010. The victim in that case was undergoing course in a prestigious institute. The accident in the instant case occurred in the year 2015. There is no specific evidence on record regarding merit or future prospect of the deceased. Therefore, considering all relevant factors and the material which have come on record, it will be appropriate to determine the potential income of the deceased at Rs. 12,000/- per month. The accident in the instant case occurred in the year 2015. There is no specific evidence on record regarding merit or future prospect of the deceased. Therefore, considering all relevant factors and the material which have come on record, it will be appropriate to determine the potential income of the deceased at Rs. 12,000/- per month. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded 9% interest per annum on the compensation amount. Accordingly the payable compensation is worked out as under :- 1. Income of deceased Rs.12,000/- 2. Additional 40% on account of future prospects as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC) Rs.12,000x40/100=4,800/- 3. Total Income Rs.12,000+4800 =Rs.16,800/- 4. 1/2 deducted for personal expenses as per Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009 (6) SCC 121 Rs.16,800 / 2 = 8,400/- 5. Loss of Dependency Rs.8,400/- 6. Multiplier of 18 considering age of deceased Total amount = Rs.8,400 x 12 x 18 = 18,14,400/- 7. Loss of parental consortium Rs.40,000/- 8. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- 9. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Grand Total Rs.18,84,400 70% of Rs.18,84,400/- comes to Rs.13,19,080/- + 9% interest p.a. Learned Tribunal has fixed the liability of the appellant to the extent of 70% of the total compensation amount. This has been accepted by the claimant. Accordingly, appellant is held liable to pay 70% of the total compensation amount of Rs.18,84,400/- i.e. Rs.13,19,080/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum. The award dated 24.12.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Una in M.A.C. Petition No. 126 of 2015 is modified to the aforesaid extent. Remaining part of the award including the interest component awarded therein shall remain as it is. Registry is directed to release the compensation amount, alongwith upto date interest, to the claimant/respondent No. 1 in terms of this judgment on her furnishing the details of her bank account. The appeal stands disposed, so also the pending applications, if any.