IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH (15TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY MA CMA No.2734 of 2008 Between: Kalva Ramadevi & others … Appellants And: V.R.Prasada Reddy & others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY MA CMA No.2734 of 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order dated 17.03.2006 in OP No.642 of 2003 on the ﬁle of the MACT cum Principal District Judge, Kadapa, wherein, the said claim application ﬁled by the appellants herein under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, was allowed in part, awarding compensation of Rs.2,59,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The claimants ﬁled claim application seeking compensation of Rs.6 lakhs for the death of the deceased Nagabhushanam @ Bhushanam, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 13.01.2003. The ﬁrst claimant is the wife, 2nd claimant is the mother and 3rd claimant is the brother of the deceased. According to the claimants on that day, the deceased was returning to Kadapa in a jeep bearing No.AP 04 U 385 belonging to the ﬁrst respondent and at about 8.15 a.m., due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver, who tried to over take a lorry and RTC bus, dashed against RTC bus, resulting in the death of the deceased. It is further pleaded that the deceased was aged 35 years and was working as gas cylinders supplier and earning Rs.1682/- per month, besides Rs.1.25 per cylinder per day. 4. The ﬁrst respondent-owner of the jeep remained ex-parte. The 2nd respondent-insurer ﬁled counter, opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During enquiry, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.6 were marked on behalf of the claimants. RWs.1 to 3 were examined and Ex.B.1 copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the insurer. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2,59,000/-. Accordingly, an award was passed for the said amount with interest at 7.5% per annum. Not satisﬁed with the said award, the present appeal is ﬁled by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation. 6. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants is that the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.1682/- per month, which is meager and the Tribunal failed to take the income of the deceased by way of commission and tips. 7. The evidence on record shows that the deceased was working as gas cylinders supplier. The claimants themselves ﬁled Ex.A.5 salary certiﬁcate and Ex.A.6 audit report. The evidence on record further shows that the deceased was earning some amount by way of commission and tips. According to the claimants, the deceased was also getting Rs.1.25 per cylinder per day and on average, he used to deliver 40 to 50 cylinders and that he was also getting Rs.2/- or Rs.3/- per cylinder by way of tips from the consumers. Even if the tip amounts are not considered for want of any proof, the commission paid by the company at the rate of Rs.1.25 per each cylinder cannot be ignored. Though, there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased used to deliver 40 to 50 cylinders every day as claimed, still it can be reasonably estimated that the deceased will be getting a sum of Rs.50/- per day by way of commission and at that rate, his income from the commission would be around Rs.1500/- per month. The total income of the deceased can therefore be reasonably estimated at Rs.3000/- per month. Even daily wage earner can be reasonably expected to earn not less than Rs.100/- per day by way of hard labour and therefore, the income of the deceased, who was employed by the company as cylinder supplier and whose employment, salary and emoluments were also borne out by the records of the company, can be reasonably estimated at Rs.3000/- per month. Deducting 1/3rd thereof towards personal expenses, the contribution of the deceased to the family can be assessed at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. As per the recent decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case [(2009)6 SCC 121], the appropriate multiplier for the age of the deceased, who was aged 35 years is ‘16’. Applying the same, the loss of dependency works to Rs.24,000/- x 16 = Rs.3,84,000/-. The claimants are also entitled for a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and ﬁrst claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.4,04,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. No order as to costs. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 15.11.2011 bss