THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.913 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 05.08.2002, in M.V.O.P.No.386 of 1997, passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Chittoor (for brevity “the Tribunal”), awarding a sum of Rs.94,000/- as against the claim of Rs.2,75,000/- made by the appellants-claimants, being the parents and brother of the deceased Ayub Khan, who died in a motor accident that occurred on 13.10.1997 at about 2.30 a.m., due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of the lorry (Tanker), bearing registration No.KA-02-5533, belonging to the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent-United India Insurance Company Limited, the present civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred. 3. Appellants are claimants, 1st respondent is the owner of the offending lorry (Tanker), 2nd respondent is its insurer and 3rd respondent is the owner of the lorry for whom the deceased was working as Driver. 4. This is a case of death in a road accident. The particulars regarding the method and manner in which the accident occurred and the aspect of negligence 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.94,000/- towards compensation. Having not satisfied with the same, the appellants-claimants have preferred the present appeal. 5. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified. 6. From the impugned order, it could be seen that the death was occurred because of the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending lorry (Tanker). When it comes to the aspect of compensation, the deceased was found to be working as driver of the lorry belonging to the 3rd respondent and earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. But, there is no evidence as regards the actual income of the deceased. However, the Tribunal notionally fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.1,000/- and accordingly assessed the annual income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/-. After deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, arrived at the annual income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- and by taking into consideration the age of the mother of the deceased, who is more than 45 years old, fixed the compensation at Rs.94,000/-. 7. In this regard, it is to be seen that as per the judgment of the apex Court in SARLA VERMA v. DTC[1], 50% of the annual income of the deceased has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses having regard to the fact that the deceased was unmarried and the age of the mother in such cases will be taken into account as per the multiplier specified in II Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In this case, the age of the mother of the deceased was more than 45 years and in which event, the proper multiplier would be ’15’. Even if taking into account the annual income arrived at by the Tribunal at Rs.12,000/-, 50% of the said amount would come to Rs.6,000/-. If the same is multiplied by ‘15’, it comes to Rs.90,000/-. But, as already opined, the exact figure cannot be arrived at and certainly the annual income of the deceased would be around Rs.15,000/-. Therefore, keeping this in mind and also in order to meet the ends of justice, I feel it appropriate to fix the compensation at Rs.1,00,000/-. 8. In addition to the said amount, the Tribunal erred in not awarding compensation towards loss of estate and also funeral expenses. Therefore, I feel it just and proper to award Rs.5,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, the total amount of compensation on all counts would be Rs.1,10,000/- (Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation + Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate + Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses). 9. Accordingly, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the total amount of compensation from Rs.94,000/- to Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand only). The additional amount of Rs.16,000/- (Rupees sixteen thousand only) shall carry interest at 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. before the Tribunal, till realization. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 08.07.2010. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.913 of 2003 08.07.2010 (Msr) [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121