THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 3273 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved against the order and decree dated 10.07.2002 in O.P.No.466 of 2000 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Nalgonda, the claimants- appellants filed the present appeal. The appellants herein are the legal representatives of the deceased-D. Purushotham Reddy, who died in a motor accident on 20.08.2000. The O.P. was filed claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. After due trial, the Tribunal below awarded compensation of Rs.75,000/- to the appellants-claimants. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed mainly urging that the compensation granted by the Tribunal below is very meagre. Now the point for consideration is whether the appellants- claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation. The factum of accident was not disputed in this case. On behalf of the appellants/claimants, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, none were examined but Ex.B.1 was marked. The offending vehicle had valid insurance coverage on the date of the accident as per Ex.B.1. P.W.1 is the mother of the deceased. It is the claim of the appellants-claimants that the deceased was aged about 26 years and was earning Rs.4,000/- per month as electrician. The Tribunal below has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.900/- per month and has taken Rs.500/- per month as his contribution to the family. If the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.900/- per month, the annual income will be Rs.10,800/-. As per the evidence of P.W.1, the deceased was an electrician. Therefore, his earning capacity can be safely taken as Rs.15,000/- per year instead Rs.1,050/- per month arrived at by the Tribunal below by fixing the income Rs.900/- per month. As such, the income of the deceased as electrician is taken as Rs.15,000/- per month. The deceased being unmarried, half of the earnings has to be deducted towards his contribution of his family. Therefore, the annual contribution of the family comes to Rs.7500/-. The age of the first petitioner i.e., the mother of the deceased is shown to be about 45 years. Therefore, the multiplier of 14 is to be applied as per the decisions in Sarla Verma Vs., Delhi Transport Corporation[1]. The Tribunal below applied multiplier only 10 instead of 14. Therefore, the total income comes to 1,05,000/- (Rs.7500/- x 14). The appellants-claimants are also entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards non pecuniary damages. In all the appellants-claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.1,05,000/-+ Rs.15,000/-). With the above modifications, the appeal is partly allowed enhancing the total compensation from Rs.75,000/- to Rs.1,20,000/-. As seen from the impugned order, the Tribunal below granted interest at 9% per annum. The same is reduced to 6% per annum from the date of the petition by applying the principles laid down in Sarla Vermas case (1 supra). ______________ K.S.APPA RAO,J 1st April 2011 bud [1] (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121