THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA C.M.A.No.3879 of 2002 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimants against the order dated 19.06.2002 in O.P.No.451 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge at Nizamabad whereby and whereunder the petition of the claimants was partly allowed granting a total compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- as against the claim of Rs.3,00,000/-, with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition till realisation. 2. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal can be summarized as follows: The deceased was working as a Cleaner on a lorry bearing No. AP- 25-T-5345; that on 12.01.2000 the said lorry was proceeding from Vijayawada to Nizamabad and during night time, the lorry was parked near a hotel at Bhiknoor on N.H. 7; that on the following morning i.e. on 13.1.2000 at about 7.00 a.m. while the deceased was standing by the side of the road near the hotel, a lorry bearing No.AP-9U-3708 came from Kamareddy side at high speed driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver and dashed against him and as a result thereof, he suffered multiple grievous injuries; that he was shifted to Government hospital at Kamareddy and on medical advice while he was being carried to Gandhi hospital, Secunderabad, he succumbed to the injuries. Bhikhoor P.S. registered a case in Crime No.5/2000 under Section 304-A IPC against the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.AP-9U-3708; that the deceased prior to the accident was hale and healthy and was aged about 18 years and that as a Cleaner he was earning Rs.4,000/- per month. 3. The second respondent-insurance company denied the petition averments including rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry bearing registration No. AP-9U-3708, and the involvement of the said vehicle in the accident. It has also denied the age, avocation and earnings of the deceased. 4. Basing on the pleading of both sides, the lower Tribunal has framed the relevant issues as to the negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP-9U-3708 and also as to the entitlement of the claimants to receive compensation as well as liability of the respondents to pay the amount. 5. The first claimant who is father of the deceased got himself examined as PW.1 besides examining the owner of the hotel as an eye witness to the accident as PW.2 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.8. However, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the respondents. 6. Taking into consideration the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 coupled with Exs.A1-FIR, A2-inqeust panchanama, A.4-charge sheet and Ex.A.6-M.V.I. report, the Tribunal gave a finding that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.AP-9U-3708. While answering the second issue as to the entitlement of the claimants to receive compensation, the quantum thereof and the liability of the respondents to pay the same, the lower Tribunal considered that as per the evidence of PW.1, the deceased was aged 20 years at the time of the death in the accident and as a lorry Cleaner he was earning Rs.4,000/- per month and was contributing the same towards maintenance of the claimants. However, as per Ex-A2- inquest panchanama and Ex.A.3-P.M.E report, the deceased was aged 18 years at the time of the death in the accident and that he was unmarried, and as such, the Tribunal had taken into consideration the age of his mother. As she was aged 36 years at that time, multiplier ‘16’ was applied. While holding that Ex.A5- salary certificate of the deceased was not proved in view of the fact that his employer who issued the said exhibit was not examined, the Tribunal has fixed the monthly earnings of the deceased at Rs.1500/-, out of which 1/3rd was deducted towards his personal expenses and thus arrived at Rs.1,000/- as his monthly income which comes to Rs.12,000/- per annum. Thus the loss of estate was assessed as Rs.12,000 x16=1,92,000/- and awarded the same towards loss of estate and in addition thereto the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of love and affection. Thus the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and fastened the joint and several liability to pay the said compensation amount to the claimants on the first and second respondents in view of Ex.A.7- insurance policy being in force by the time of the accident. 7. It is the case of the appellants that the Tribunal erred in fixing the monthly earnings of the deceased at Rs.1,500/- disregarding Ex.A.5- salary certificate, as per which, the deceased was earning a salary of Rs.2,500/- per month besides batta of Rs.50/- per day i.e. a total amount of Rs.4,000/- per month. Though the deceased was stated to be working on a salary, and though Ex.A5- salary certificate was filed, the Tribunal did not accept Ex.A5, and has fixed monthly earnings at Rs.1500/- and thus assessed the loss of estate by adopting the multiplier ‘16’ considering the age of his mother to be 36 years at Rs.1,92,000/- besides granting Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of love and affection. It is further contended that the Tribunal also failed to award any amount towards transport charges though soon after the accident the deceased was shifted to Government hospital, Kamareddy and from-there he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad. 8. The case of the respondent-insurance company is that the Tribunal was in error in deducting 1/3rd of the monthly earnings of the deceased towards his personal expenses, instead of deducting half of his monthly earnings as he was an unmarried person by the time of his death in the accident. It is further case of the respondent-insurance company that the Tribunal after considering that Ex.A5- salary certificate which is not supported by any material to show that the deceased was earning Rs.4,000/-, fixed his monthly earnings at Rs.1,500/- treating him non-earning person and as such there is little or no scope to enhance the compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal. 9. In view of the evidence brought on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that the Tribunal is justified in brushing aside Ex.A.5-salary certificate in fixing the monthly earnings of the deceased since his employer who issued Ex.A.5 was not examined to corroborate the contents thereof. However, in the circumstances, this court is of the view that an amount of Rs.5,000/- may be awarded towards transport charges and the same is hereby awarded, which is just and reasonable. So far as the contention of the insurance company that the Tribunal committed error in deducting 1/3rd of the monthly earnings of the deceased towards personal expenses, instead of half of his monthly earnings is concerned, the Tribunal appears to have done so considering the fact that there are four claimants who were depending on the earnings of the deceased. 10. Therefore, it is to be held that the appellants-claimants are entitled to claim a total compensation of Rs.2,05,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Five Thousand) only (i.e. Rs.1,92,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.5,000/- towards transport charges) with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation. 11. With the above modification, the C.M.A. is disposed of. ​ __________________ B.N.Rao Nalla,J 09 -9-2010 Stp