IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTYEIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.4147 of 2003 Between: Male Ramulu and another .. Appellants AND G. Subhash and another .. Respondents JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award dated 26-03-2002 in O.P.No.427 of 2001 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Nalgonda. O.P.No.427 of 2001 and batch arising out of the same accident were disposed of by a common order and the factual background is that Male Yadaiah and others were coming in jeep No.AP-11-E-8891 on 28-01-2001 and near Sangaram bus stage, the jeep dashed against a neem tree due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver. Yadaiah and others died and the parents of Yadaiah claimed a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- from the owner and insurer of the jeep. While the owner remained ex parte, the insurer contested the claim denying the allegations and putting the claimants to strict proof of their claims. All the claims arising out of the same accident were clubbed and tried together on the common issues about the responsibility of the driver for the accident due to his rash and negligent driving of the jeep and the entitlement of the claimants to compensation. During the course of enquiry, PWs.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.16 were marked. The Tribunal rendered the impugned award, firstly accepting the eye-witness account of PWs.1 to 4 about the rash and negligent driving of the jeep by its driver, which allegation was corroborated by Ex.A.1-First Information Report. The Tribunal, in assessing the quantum of compensation, took the age of the mother of Yadaiah as 40 years and in the absence of any documentary evidence to show the income of the deceased, decided the contribution to the family to be Rs.500/- per month being half of the assessed monthly income of Rs.1,000/-, as the deceased was unmarried. The loss of dependency was thus arrived at Rs.72,000/-, while a further sum of Rs.15,000/- were awarded towards non-pecuniary damages. On the said sum of Rs.87,000/-, the Tribunal awarded interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation and proportionate costs. The parents were aggrieved by the quantum of compensation and filed the present appeal contending that the deceased aged 25 years was earning Rs.3,000/- per month as salary and Rs.50/- per day as batta. The contribution should have been taken at a minimum of Rs.2,000/- per month and appropriate multiplier ought to have been applied. Sri G. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri M. Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants is heard. The owner of the vehicle remained unrepresented before this Court and the 2nd respondent-insurer is represented by its learned standing counsel. The finding of the Tribunal about the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the jeep leading to the accident has become final in the absence of any challenge from any party and the ownership of the vehicle with the 1st respondent and its subsisting insurance with the 2nd respondent are not in dispute. The deceased was stated to be having a valid driving licence and to be working as driver by the time of his death. Even assuming that the claimants did not file any documentary evidence in support of his income, the Tribunal should have noted that even non-earning persons are presumed to be earning Rs.15,000/- p.a. as per the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act. The minimum wages payable under the Minimum Wages Act to even unskilled labourers would never have been as low as Rs.1,000/- per month, which was taken as the basis by the Tribunal. Though the Tribunal rightly took into account the age of the mother for arriving at the appropriate multiplier for assessing the compensation for the death of the unmarried son, the appropriate multiplier applicable is 15 according to Sarla verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another[1]. Even if the presumed income of a non-earning person at Rs.15,000/- p.a. were to be taken into account and if a deduction of 1/3rd were to be made as done earlier by the Tribunal towards personal and living expenses, the parents would have been entitled to the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- claimed by them. If the minimum wages payable to a driver at the relevant time were to be taken into account and even if half of the same were to be deducted towards personal and living expenses as laid down in Sarla verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (stated supra), even then the annual contribution could not have been less than the said sum of Rs.10,000/-. In addition, the parents would also have been entitled to Rs.5,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, apart from a further reasonable sum towards loss of love and affection. Before the Tribunal and before this Court, the claim of the claimants is confined to Rs.1,50,000/- in total and this appeal is only for the balance out of Rs.1,50,000/- not granted by the Tribunal, which sum, therefore, has to be straight away granted. Considering the length of time for which the interest has to be paid on such enhanced portion of the compensation, the same can be restricted to 6% p.a., while proportionate costs, of course, shall follow suit. In the result, the award dated 26-03-2002 in O.P.No.427 of 2001 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-Principal District Judge, Nalgonda, is modified by awarding a further compensation of Rs.63,000/- with interest thereon at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation and proportionate costs, in addition to the compensation already awarded by the impugned award and the appeal is allowed accordingly without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 28-03-2011 Ksn [1] 2009 ACJ 1298