In Kiran Devi and another v. Surjit Yadav and others II
(2010) ACC 289, it was held that in absence of cogent and
reliable evidence of monthly income at the time of accident, the
thumb rule is minimum wages notified under the minimum
wages Act prevalent at the time of accident may be considered.
But an observation made
by this court, mainly to achieve uniformity and
MACT No. 102/13 LRs of Laxmi v Nand Kishore 16 of 21
17
consistency on a socioeconomic issue, as contrasted
from a legal principle, though a precedent, can be,
and in fact ought to be periodically revisited, as
observed in Santosh Devi(Supra). We may therefore,
revisit the practice of awarding compensation under
conventional heads: loss of consortium to the spouse,
loss of love, care and guidance to children and
funeral expenses. It may be noted that the sum of Rs.
2500/ to Rs. 10,000/ in those heads was fixed
several decades ago and having regard to inflation
factor, the same needs to be increased.