THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.814 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-A.P. State Road Transport Corporation as well as the learned counsel for the respondent-claimant. 2. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 20.8.2002, in O.P.No.1012 of 1997, passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad (for brevity “the Tribunal”), awarding compensation of Rs.1,46,000/- as against the claim of Rs.2,50,000/- for the damages caused to the DCM van, bearing registration No.AP 12T 2472, belonging to the respondent-claimant, in the accident that occurred on 11.7.1997 at 3-45 p.m., near Amaravathi temple, Gundlapochampally, due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of the bus, bearing registration No.AP 10Z 2290, belonging to the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, the present civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the Corporation. 3. The appellant herein is the Corporation and the respondent is the owner of the DCM van, which was damaged in the accident. The particulars regarding the method and manner in which the accident took place are not referred to since already on record. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, awarded a sum of Rs.1,46,000/- towards damages caused to the DEM van. Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation has filed the present appeal. 4. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards damages is proper and justified. 5. It is not in dispute that the accident took place and the DCM van belonging to the respondent got severely damaged. The Surveyor of the motor vehicles, who was examined as P.W.2, assessed the damages to a tune of Rs.2,50,000/-. It is further on record that the vehicle was purchased in the year 1994 for a sum of Rs.3,30,000/-. The Tribunal, while considering the evidence of P.W.2, had taken note of the fact that the depreciation of the vehicle will be deducted at 5% for 1st year, 10% for 2nd year, 15% for 3rd year, 25% for 4th year, 35% for 5th year, 5 to 10 years 40%, and after 10 years 50%. Therefore, I am of the view that from the actual value of the vehicle, the periodical depreciation value was scientifically estimated and the same was deducted from the total value of the vehicle. Apart from that, the vehicle was sold away through a mechanic for a sum of Rs.70,000/-, since the vehicle was badly damaged and of no use for the purpose for which it was meant. Therefore, the Tribunal had rightly deducted the said sale value and also the depreciation value from the original price of the vehicle and arrived at the conclusion to award a compensation of Rs.1,46,000/- towards damages. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards damages. 6. However, it is to be seen that the Tribunal had awarded interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. before the Tribunal, till realization. In my considered view, the said rate of interest is on higher side. Therefore, I am inclined to reduce the rate of interest from 9% to 7.5% from the date of filing of the O.P., before the Tribunal, till realization. 7. Subject to above modification, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 24.06.2010 Msr. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.814 of 2003 24.06.2010 (Msr)