IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3692 of 2003 Between: G. Narisi Reddy and another .. Appellants AND Rambabu Chowdhary and another .. Respondents JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award in O.P. No.2546 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 11-06-2003. G. Shekar Reddy, aged 20 years, was going on scooter as a pillion rider on 20-10-2001 at about 2.30 P.M. and near Shabnam petrol bunk on the way from Hayatnagar to L.B. Nagar, auto No.AP11 V9037 driven rashly and negligently in high speed hit the scooter. Shekar Reddy died on his way to hospital due to injuries and the parents claimed a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- from the owner and insurer of the auto. The owner of the auto remained ex parte, while the insurer contested the claim denying the allegations of the claimants. The Tribunal framed issues on the responsibility for the accident and the entitlement of the claimants to compensation and during the enquiry, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.11 and B.1 were marked. The Tribunal rendered the impugned award firstly accepting Ex.A.1 first information report, Ex.A.2 charge-sheet and Ex.A.4 inquest report to conclude that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto. The Tribunal referred to the evidence of P.W.3, the Managing Director of the employer of the deceased and Ex.A.6 salary certificate about the deceased earning Rs.2,500/- per month. But in the absence of production of any corroborating register or record of the employer, the Tribunal took the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month. The contribution to the parents was taken at Rs.650/- per month and as the deceased died unmarried, the Tribunal took the age of the mother as above 40 years and applied a multiplier of 15. The Tribunal, hence, consequently awarded Rs.1,17,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.1,000/- towards transport and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all, Rs.1,35,000/- were awarded with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization and proportionate costs. The parents were aggrieved by the meagre compensation awarded and contended that the entire compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- as claimed by them ought to have been granted in view of the income of the deceased and his contributing the entire salary to them. The contribution even on the income of Rs.2,000/- should have been taken at Rs.1,400/- in the minimum. Sri B. Parameswara Rao, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent insurer are heard and the 1st respondent owner of the vehicle was stated to be not a necessary party to the appeal. The finding of the Tribunal about the rash and negligent driving of the auto leading to the accident is not challenged by any party and the ownership of the auto with the 1st respondent and its subsisting insurance with the 2nd respondent are not in dispute. The joint and several liability of respondents 1 and 2, therefore, to justly and adequately compensate the parents is well settled. It is only the quantum of compensation that is in question and the material on record shows that apart from the interested claims of father as P.W.1, the employer of the deceased/Managing Director of M/s. Adarsh Security Training & Placement Services as P.W.3, stated on oath before the Tribunal that the deceased was working as office boy being paid Rs.2,500/- per month as salary. Ex.A.10 SSC certificate and Ex.A.11 registration certificate of the employer were to corroborate the claim and Ex.A.6 salary certificate was not acted upon by the Tribunal only on the ground that the employment register was not filed and any other record to show the employment and salary were also not filed. However, when the employer was a registered concern and its Managing Director stated on oath about the employment and salary of the deceased, there is no reason to discredit the same in the absence of any contrary evidence and the employer/P.W.3 was not alleged or shown to be so interested in the deceased or the parents as to resort to falsehood to help them and the income of the deceased should have been taken at least at the rate at which it was being paid at the time of his death, even if no addition was made for any prospects in his career in future. The age of the mother was admittedly stated in the claim petition as 39 years and even in the absence of any material to deviate from the same, the Tribunal considered it safe to treat her as aged above 40 years. Even assuming that she was aged about 40 and not above 40 years, the appropriate multiplier applicable is 15 as applied by the Tribunal according to Sarala Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation[1] and the deduction that should be made in respect of the personal and living expenses of the deceased will be 50% as per the said decision in case of the death of a bachelor with the parents being claimants. If so, on the balance income of Rs.1,250/- per month, if the multiplier of 15 is adopted, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.2,25,000/-. Sarala Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (1 supra) also granted Rs.5,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and towards loss of love and affection, the parents can be granted Rs.10,000/- more at the same rate at which loss of consortium is compensated by Sarala Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (1 supra). If so, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,45,000/- and such quantum of just and adequate compensation should also carry interest and proportionate costs on the same. However, in view of the length of time for which such interest has to be paid, the same can be restricted to 6 per cent per annum. Accordingly, the award dated 11-06-2003 in O.P. No.2546 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad is modified by awarding a further compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees one lakh and ten thousand only) with interest thereon at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization and proportionate costs in addition to the compensation already awarded by the impugned award and the appeal is allowed in part accordingly without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 28-03-2011 Svv [1] 2009 ACJ 1298