HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.No.1774 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: United India Insurance Company Limited filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act aggrieved by the order and decree dated 01-10-2002 in O.P.No.765 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nizamabad. 2. The facts, in nutshell, are that on 15-3-2000 at about 10 a.m. while Badavath Chandra Bhanu was standing on the side of the road near Nadpally Thanda of Dichpally Mandal, the lorry bearing No.AP- 28U-2628 driven in rash and negligent manner and at high speed, dashed him, which resulted in his death. Mother of the deceased filed the above OP claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- from the owner and insurer of the lorry involved in the accident. The Tribunal after considering the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and Exs.A-1 to A-7 on behalf of the claimant and Ex.B-1 copy of the insurance policy, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver and granted compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- with proportionate costs with interest at 9% per annum as against the owner and insurer of the lorry. Aggrieved thereby, the insurer preferred this appeal. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent-claimant and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the deceased boy was aged 9 years at the time of accident and as such, the Tribunal erred in applying Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act and that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent claimant contended that the Tribunal granted meagre compensation and the same requires enhancement. 5. It is seen from the record that PW-2 is an eye-witness to the accident and he narrated as to how accident had occurred and nothing contra is elicited in his cross-examination. The fact of the accident was further proved by Exs.A-1, A-3, A-5 and A6. Apart from that, though it was contended that the lorry driver was not at fault, he was not examined and no evidence was adduced by the owner and insurer of lorry involved in the accident except marking Ex.B-1 copy of insurance policy. Thus, the Tribunal rightly held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of lorry by its driver. 6. Coming to the compensation, it is seen from the impugned order that the Tribunal had taken the notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum, and deducted one-third towards personal living expenses, and applied '15' multiplier as per Second Schedule of Motor Vehicles Act. Having regard to the age of the deceased, the Tribunal rightly fixed the notional income as Rs.15,000/- per annum and applied multiplier as per Second Schedule of Motor Vehicles Act and arrived at the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. This is a case where 9 years old died in the accident and the claimant being mother, I am inclined to grant Rs.10,000/- towards love and affection. Thus, the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,60,000/-. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the cross- objection is allowed with proprotionate costs enhancing the compensation to Rs.1,60,000/-. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 7% per annum from the date of petition till payment. GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. 15-7-2010 bsc