HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR C.M.A.No.3130 of 2003 Date: 22.08.2012 Between: National Insurance Co. Ltd., rep.by its Divisional Manager, Sri Complex, 2nd floor, Main Road, Kakinada … Appellant AND Bonu Mariyamma, w/o. Durga Rao, r/o.D.No.1-53, Ganganapalli, Kakinada Rural Mandal. and 3 others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR C.M.A.No.3130 of 2003 JUDGMENT: What is the rate at which personal and living expenses deserve to be deducted is the only question for consideration in this appeal. The appeal was filed by the insurer who is the third respondent in M.V.O.P.No.383 of 2000 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Kakinada. The mother and sister of the deceased-Bonu Pothuraju @ Raju laid the claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act, for short) for grant of compensation at Rs.2,00,000/-. The trial Court awarded compensation as prayed for together with interest at 9% per annum. 2. The deceased was 16 years old at the time of his death. He was studying IX class. The claimants contended that the deceased was working as a labourer as well and was earning Rs.2,000/- per month. They claimed that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent in driving the bus belonging to the second respondent-College and that consequently, respondents 1 to 3 as the driver, owner and insurer were jointly and severally liable to satisfy the claim. There is no dispute regarding the accident. There is no dispute that the accident was on account of the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent. Albeit the claim was that the deceased was earning Rs.2,000/- per month, the trial Court worked out the income of the deceased at Rs.50/- per day and Rs.1,500/- per month. The appellant has not seriously contested this finding of the trial Court. I consider that the trial Court was perfectly justified in determining the income of the deceased at Rs.50/- per day and Rs.1,500/- per month where the deceased was 16 years old and was a student. 3. The trial Court considered multiplier 16 on the ground that the mother of the deceased was 35 years old at the time of the death of the deceased and determined compensation. Mother’s age in case of death of an unmarried child is considered to be the relevant factor in deciding the multiplier. As the mother of the deceased was shown to be 35 years old, application of multiplier 16 by the trial Court is also justified. 4. The real dispute is regarding the amount liable to be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. The learned trial Judge deducted 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal and living expenses. Sri Gadi Ramachandra Reddy, learned counsel for the insurer submitted that Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation[1] ordained that in case of unmarried persons, 50% of the income deserves to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. Sri K.L.N. Rao, learned counsel for the claimants, on the other hand, contended that deduction of 50% of the income of the unmarried person towards personal and living persons is not a rule of thumb and that in appropriate cases, lesser amount can be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. He placed reliance upon United India Insurance Co. Ltd, Hyderabad v. G. Saroja[2]. In that case, a learned single Judge of this Court held that in appropriate cases, the deduction can be 1/3rd of the income of the deceased unmarried persons. This Court held thus: “10. Strong reliance is placed by the learned Counsel for the appellant on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation 2009 (3) LD 83 (SC) = 2009 ACJ 1298 and he urges that the deduction in respect of unmarried persons shall be half. 11. A perusal of the said judgment discloses that, though the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that in respect of unmarried persons, the deduction can be to the extent of 50%, it was not laid down as an absolute principle. It is clearly mentioned that, in case the family is large, a different approach can be adopted. 12. In Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deo Patodi and others, 2009 ACJ 2349 which was decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, almost at the same time, when Sarla Verma’s case (supra), was decided, the deduction in respect of the contribution to the family of a deceased unmarried person was restricted to one-third………….” 5. On the basis of this decision, it is contended by the learned counsel for the claimants that the trial Court appropriately deducted 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal and living expenses. In that case, the deceased was a 23 year old mechanic in an engineering concern. The learned single Judge placed reliance upon Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deo Patodi[3] to conclude that 1/3rd of the income of the deceased deserves to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. In that case, the deceased was a graduate from a University in the United Kingdom. In the cited case also, the deceased was a technician and had a bright future. As against those facts, in the present case, there is no whisper that the deceased had been a bright student. Although he was 16 years old, he was in IX class only instead of being in Intermediate. I do not consider that the facts in G. Saroja or Deo Patodi synchronize with the facts of the present case. In the present case, I consider that it would be just and proper to follow the view of Sarla Verma and deduct half of the income of the deceased towards his personal and living expenses. 6. As already pointed out, the monthly income of the deceased was rightly worked out by the trial Court at Rs.1,500/- per month. The annual income consequently is Rs.18,000/-. As multiplier 16 is the appropriate multiplier in view of the age of the mother of the deceased, if the annual income of the deceased is multiplied by 16, the amount would be Rs.2,88,000/-. As half of the same deserves to be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, loss of dependency and future expectancy of life is at Rs.1,44,000/-. The trial Court awarded Rs.8,000/- towards loss of love and affection. Curiously, the trial Court did not award other conventional amounts. The claimants shall be entitled to Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate, and Rs.1,000/- towards transport charges. 7. The claimants shall be entitled to interest over this awarded amount at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit and not at 9% per annum, in view of Sarla Verma. The claimants, accordingly, are entitled to compensation at a) Compensation towards loss of income and future expectancy of life .. Rs.1,44,000/- b) Compensation towards loss of love and affection .. 8,000/- c) Compensation towards funeral expenses .. 2,000/- d) Compensation towards loss of estate .. 10,000/- e) Compensation towards transport charges .. 1,000/- ----------------- Total .. Rs.1,65,000/- ============ 8. The claimants shall be entitled to at Rs.1,65,000/- together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit. 9. Another contention has been raised by the counsel for the claimants that the insurer did not obtain permission u/s.170 of M.V. Act from the trial Court and that the very appeal, therefore, is not maintainable. The learned counsel for the appellant produced certified copy of the orders in I.A.No.2805 of 2001 in O.P.No.383 of 2000 before the trial Court. Through orders dated 08.04.2002, the trial Court allowed the petition u/s.170 of M.V. Act. Consequently, the objection of the claimants regarding the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that the appellant did not obtain permission u/s.170 of M.V. Act is not sustainable. 9. For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The compensation awarded by the trial Court is reduced to Rs.1,65,000/-. Interest on the awarded amount is scaled down to 6% per annum payable from the date of petition till deposit. The first claimant shall be entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- out of the awarded amount. The second claimant shall be entitled to Rs.65,000/- out of the awarded amount. Each of the claimants is entitled to interest pro-rata. The first claimant shall be entitled to costs of the claim also. After deposit, the first claimant is entitled to withdraw Rs.50,000/- at the first instance. The balance amount shall lie in fixed deposit for a period of three years at the end of which the first claimant shall be entitled to withdraw the balance amount together with accrued interest and costs. The second claimant, after she attains majority, shall be entitled to withdraw Rs.40,000/- at the first instance. The balance amount shall lie in fixed deposit for a period of three years at the end of which the second claimant shall be entitled to withdraw the balance amount together with accrued interest. The second claimant, however, shall be entitled to withdraw the entire amount, after she attains majority, in the event her marriage is fixed. There shall be no order as to costs in the present appeal. __________________ K.G. SHANKAR, J Date: 22.08.2012 Isn [1] 2009 ACJ 1298 [2] 2011 (1) ALD 684 [3] 2009 ACJ 2349