THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.NOS.3127 OF 2011 JUDGMENT:- The appeal is ﬁled by the Insurance Company against the award in O.P.No.1489 of 2001 on the ﬁle of the Court of III Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Warangal. The petitioners have made a claim for Rs.4 lakhs consequent on the death of the deceased-Bandari Bidari who died in a motor accident on 10-11-2001 due to hit of a lorry bearing No.AP9V 6583 in a rash and negligent manner. The ﬁrst petitioner is the wife and the petitioners 2 and 3 are the children. After considering the material evidence on record, lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.3,70,000/-. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appeal is filed. Now the point that arises for consideration is:- Whether the amount of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and reasonable? POINT:- So far as the nature of the incident is concerned, there is no dispute and the cause of death was also accepted by lower Tribunal. The petitioners’ claim that the deceased was aged about 59 years and was a pensioner getting a sum of Rs.5,500/-. The lower Tribunal has taken into consideration the available evidence on record, came to a conclusion that the pension of the deceased was Rs.5,364/-. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that there is no loss of earning as even after the death of the deceased, the pension will be given to the wife and she was getting the same. However, it is to be noted that the petitioners 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased and the family pension which ﬁrst petitioner gets may not be the same which was earned by the deceased. Therefore, taking into consideration the above facts the income ﬁxed by the lower Tribunal cannot be said to be excessive since there is also possibility of enhancing the pension after a period of ten years. Therefore, I do not ﬁnd any merits in the said contention, but, however, the interest granted by the lower tribunal is at 9% and in view of the settled proposition of law, the interest is reduced to 7.5%. With the above modiﬁcation the appeal is allowed in part. _______________________ N.R.L. NĀGESWARA RĀO,J 07-12-2011 TSNR