THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.1254 of 2010 JUDGMENT: One Sri Karne Nagaraju, son of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and brother of respondent No.3, travelled in an Auto bearing No.AP 23 U 282 on 23.07.2006 from Siddipet with a view to go to Auto Nagar. When the Auto reached a nearby Petrol Bunk, a vehicle bearing No.AP 23U 3555, owned by respondent No.4 and insured with the appellant, dashed against the Auto and the same resulted in death of Nagaraju on the spot. Crime No.73 of 2006 was registered under Section 304-A I.P.C. against the driver of the vehicle by Siddipet Rural Police Station. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 (for short ‘the respondents’) filed O.P.No.20 of 2008 before the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Medak at Siddipet (for short ‘the Tribunal’), claiming a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation. The respondents stated that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month and was contributing to the family. The appellant alone contested the matter and respondent No.4 remained ex parte. The Tribunal took the wages of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and one-third of it was deducted towards his personal expenses. Multiplier ‘19.34’ was applied by taking the age of the deceased into account and a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- was awarded as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum. The same is challenged in this appeal. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. There is no denial of the fact that the deceased died on account of the accident. P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined on behalf of the respondents and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced by the appellant and a copy of the policy was marked as Ex.B1. The negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle is evident from the contents of the First Information Report, Ex.A1, rough sketch for scene of offence, Ex.A3, and charge sheet, Ex.A7. The appellant does not challenge the finding recorded by the Tribunal to the effect that the death of the deceased occurred on account of negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle. The appellant seriously disputes the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. One of their contentions is that the deceased was a bachelor and half of his earnings ought to have been deducted towards his personal expenditure. There is no hard and fast rule in that regard. Much would depend upon the necessities of the deceased and his inclination to contribute to the family. By following the established principle of deduction of one-third, the Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the contribution of the deceased was at Rs.2,000/- per month. No interference is warranted with the same. Multiplier ‘19.34’ was applied by placing reliance upon a judgment of this Court in BHAGWAN DAS vs MOHD. ARIF[1]. However, the Parliament amended the Motor Vehicles Act, by appending Schedule II, which contains the relevant multiplier to be applied in cases of this nature. Since the deceased was unmarried, the age of his mother needs to be taken into account for this purpose. The deceased was aged 19 years. The mother of the deceased i.e. respondent No.2 is aged 38 years. For both the ages, the multiplier under the Schedule is ‘16’. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal deserves to be modified accordingly. The loss of dependency on account of the death of the deceased is arrived at Rs.3,84,000/-. The Schedule itself provides for award of amounts for funeral expenses and loss of estate. This Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the amount is rounded off to Rs.4,00,000/-. Hence, the appeal is partly allowed reducing the compensation to Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only). It is apportioned at Rs.1,50,000/- each for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Rs.1,00,000/- to respondent No.3. The amount payable to respondent No.3 shall be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank till her marriage. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall be entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs.50,000/- each, if not already withdrawn. Remaining amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank for three years. They shall be entitled to withdraw the accrued interest once in six months. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:28.07.2010 kdl [1] 1987 ACJ 1052 (A.P.)