“14.6 In the light of aforesaid opinion expressed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of National Insurance Company vs Meghji Naran Soratiya & Ors CIVIL (supra) and New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Vinish Jain And Ors Etc (supra) it can be safely concluded that in cases where the legal representatives of a deceased/victim have attained the age of majority and are not totally financially dependent upon the deceased then the deceased is likely to spare more of his income for his personal and living expenses and to contribute less towards household expenses. In the present matter, deceased Munni Lal is survived by his wife and two major daughters as well as one major son, out of whom one daughter of the deceased, namely, Sushila was married at the time of the alleged case accident and in these circumstances the primary duty of the deceased was to provide maintenance to his wife, namely, Manku Bai and his unmarried son, namely, Hari Narayan @ Harman as well as to his unmarried daughter Usha Devi. Although, Hari Narayan and Usha Devi were also major and were aged about 21 and 19 years respectively, however, it is the case of the petitioners that said Hari Narayan and Usha Devi were dependent on the income of the deceased. Despite cross examining PW1 Manku Bai, wife of the deceased and PW2 Hari Narayan son of the deceased at length no suggestion has been given to them by learned counsels for the respondents that Hari Narayan Advocate Usha Devi were not dependent on the income of the deceased. Thus, in view of the fact that only three of the legal representative of the deceased, namely, Manku Bai, Hari Narayan and Usha Devi were financially dependent upon the deceased , therefore , this court is of the opinion that 1/3 of the income of the deceased should be deducted towards his personal and living expenses and the remaining 2/3 should be considered to be his contribution towards maintenance of his wife and unmarried son Hemant .”
