SHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.5472 of 2008 Date: 22-7-2011 Between Smt. Madiga Chandramma and another … Appellants/Petitioners and Irfan Isaq Bhai Bepari and another … Respondents/ Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.5472 of 2008 Judgment: Being aggrieved by the order and decree dated 21-8-2008 in M.V.O.P.No.1449 of 2005 on the file of the XVII Additional Chief Judge cum III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the appellants-petitioners. 2. The appellants herein are the claimants in M.V.O.P.No.1449 of 2005 before the tribunal below. The claimants filed the said O.P., claiming compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- for the death of the deceased Madiga Galaiah in a road traffic accident that occurred on 21-02-2005. The tribunal below, while assessing the evidence on record, awarded compensation of Rs.3,90,000/- under all heads. Being aggrieved, the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the claimants. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants mainly urged that the tribunal below applied multiplier ‘6.99’ as per the judgment in Bhagawan Das v. Mohd. Arif (1987(2) ALT 137), which is erroneous and the tribunal below ought to have applied multiplier ‘11’ and placed reliance on a judgment of the apex Court in SARLA VERMA v. DTC[1]. He also further urged that the tribunal below granted only Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate, which are erroneous and the same have to be enhanced. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent- Insurance Company fairly conceded that multiplier ‘11’ is applicable to the present case on hand. 5. Now, the point for consideration is -- whether the appellants- claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation ? 6. Point:- The factum of accident is not disputed. The claimants, in order to prove the earnings of the deceased, filed Ex.A-8 Identity Card of the deceased as per which, the date of birth of the deceased is 19-7-1954 and he joined in service on 01-01-1982. They also filed Ex.A-6 Pay Slip of the deceased to show that the deceased was getting gross salary of Rs.7,892/-. Therefore, after deductions the annual income of the deceased comes to Rs.79,200/- (Rs.6,600/- x 12). By deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased had he been alive, the amount comes to Rs.26,400/- per annum. By deducting Rs.79,200/- – Rs.26,400/-, the contribution of the deceased towards the family comes to Rs.52,800/- per annum. The tribunal below applied multiplier ‘6.99’ as per the guidelines in Bhagawan Das’s case (supra). As per the judgment of the apex Court in SARLA VERMA’s case (1 supra), multiplier ‘11’ is to be applied for the age group of the deceased as 51 years. If the same is applied, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.5,80,800/- (Rs.52,800/- x 11). 7. The tribunal below awarded compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. By placing reliance on the judgment in SARLA VERMA’s case (1 supra), the amount of Rs.2,500/- granted by the tribunal towards the loss of estate was enhanced to Rs.5,000/- besides enhancing the amount of Rs.2,000/- granted by the tribunal below towards funeral expenses to Rs.5,000/-. In total, the compensation comes to Rs.6,05,800/- (Rupees six lakhs, five thousand and eight hundred only). 8. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part enhancing the amount of compensation awarded by the tribunal below from Rs.3,90,000/- to Rs.6,05,800/- (Rupees six lakhs, five thousand and eight hundred only). The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. No costs. ___________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J. 22nd July, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.5472 of 2008 22nd July, 2011. (Ak) [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121