THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 277 of 2008 and Cross Objections No.9866 of 2008 DATE: 23-03-2011 Between: Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. .. Appellant And K.Vijayalakshmi and 3 others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 277 of 2008 and Cross Objections No.9866 of 2008 COMMON JUDGMENT: Being aggrieved against the order and decree dated 16.04.2007 passed in M.V.O.P.No.89 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Tirupati, the present Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant urged that the lower Court liberally granted a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of guidance and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of expectation due to the death of the deceased, which is not known to law in the motor vehicle accident cases. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents-petitioners urged that to the age of 25 years the Court below failed to deduct one- fourth from out of the personal expenses by placing reliance in the decision reported in the case of SARLA VERMA (SMT) AND OTHERS vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1]. Now the point for consideration is whether there are any grounds to interfere with the finding of the lower Court? As seen from the record, the present CMA is filed by the appellant aggrieved by the finding of the lower Tribunal urging that the granting of compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of guidance to the minor petitioners and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of expectation due to the death of the deceased is erroneous. During the course of arguments the learned counsel for the respondents draws the attention of the Court for Cross Objections filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. As seen from the impugned order, one-third was deducted from out of the personal expenses of the deceased while granting compensation. As seen from the petition, the legal representatives of the deceased numbering 4 filed petition claiming compensation. By applying the dictum in SARLA VERMA’s case, one-fourth has to be deducted from the earnings of the deceased before applying the multiplier. If one-fourth is applied, the following amounts are entitled by the claimants. The income of the deceased was taken by the lower Court as Rs.3,000/- per month. Hence, the annual income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.36,000/- per annum. If the one-fourth is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, it comes to Rs.27,000/-. The contribution towards the family is Rs.27,000/- per annum. Thus, loss of income due to the death of the deceased is Rs.27,000/- X 18 (multiplier), comes to Rs.4,86,000/-. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for compensation amount of Rs.4,86,000/- (Rupees four lakhs eighty six thousand only) under the head of loss of income due to the death of the deceased. The lower Court granted Rs.4,32,000/- while deducting the one-third, which is not as per the guidelines in SARLA VERMA’s case. Therefore, an amount of Rs.4,86,000/- is granted under the head of loss of income due to the death of the deceased against the lower Court award of Rs.4,32,000/-. Admittedly, the 1st petitioner is the wife of the deceased and she is entitled for compensation under the head of loss of consortium. As per the dictum of SARLA VERMA’s case Rs.15,000/- to be granted under the head of loss of consortium. Accordingly, the same is granted. Therefore, the finding of the lower Court granting Rs.25,000/- under the said head is reduced to Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only). The lower Court granted a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of estate and there are no grounds to interfere on the finding of the lower Court. The lower Court awarded Rs.25,000/- towards loss of guidance and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of expectation due to the death of the deceased, for which the claimants are not entitled. Therefore, the claimants are only entitled for a sum of Rs.4,86,000/-, Rs.15,000/- (towards loss of consortium) and Rs.20,000/- (towards loss of estate) in total Rs.5,21,000/- (Rupees five lakhs twenty one thousand only). The claimants are entitled for the interest @ Rs.6% per annum on the said total compensation amount from the date of petition till the date of realization. With the above modification, the Cross Objections is allowed while partly allowing the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. No order as to costs. _______________ K.S.APPA RAO, J 23-03-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 277 of 2008 and Cross Objections No.9866 of 2008 DATE: 23-03-2011 MR [1] (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121