IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.No.747 of 2003 Between: Upparapalli Venkata Padmavathi and others ..... APPELLANT(S) AND Talluri Sai Prasad and others .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.No.747 of 2003 ORDER: Appellants herein filed claim petition in M.V.O.P.No.414 of 1998 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Guntur, seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- under Sections 166 and 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and Rule 455 of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, for the death of Upparapalli Vemareddy (hereinafter referred to as the – ‘the deceased’), stating that on 22.05.1998 at about 4.30 p.m., while the deceased, being the driver of the Jeep bearing No.AP-7U-5126, was proceeding from Narasaraopet to Julakallu and when reached Dechavaram, a lorry bearing No.AP-26U-1269 coming in opposite direction, in a rash and negligent manner and at a high speed, hit the Jeep resulting the death of the deceased. Respondents 1 and 3 herein remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Respondents 2 and 4, insurers of the offending vehicles, resisted the petition by filing counters denying the allegations. The Tribunal framed the following issues for trial. (1) Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP-26U-1269 or the driver of the Jeep bearing No.AP-7U-5126 or both? (2) Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation and, if so, to what amount and against whom? (3) To what relief? On behalf of the appellants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.7 were marked. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondents. Considering the material on record, the Tribunal, holding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle i.e. lorry, awarded Rs.1,67,000/- with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization as compensation to the appellants for the death of the deceased in the accident and made the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally liable to pay the same. Dissatisfied by the compensation awarded to them, the present appeal is by the claimants. The learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the Tribunal has committed error in not awarding proper compensation. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company contended that the Tribunal has granted compensation more than what the appellants are entitled to and so there is no need to enhance the same. Now the point for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is ‘Just’ and, if not, to what compensation the appellant is entitled? A perusal of the material available on record makes it clear that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of dependency; Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium; and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses; totaling to Rs.1,67,000/-. It is seen that the claimants are widow, minor children and age- old parents of the deceased who are completely dependant on the income being brought by the deceased. In those circumstances, it cannot be said that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was a ‘just’ compensation. Though the Tribunal was fair enough in working out the loss of dependency at Rs.1,60,000/-, it ought to have awarded some more amounts liberally under various heads which would meet the needs of a bereaved family. Therefore, I am inclined to grant Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses apart from Rs.1,60,000/- granted by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency. So, the appellants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of dependency + Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium + Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate + Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, totaling to Rs.1,85,000/-. However, the rate of interest on the enhanced compensation shall be at the rate of 7% per annum. Therefore, the appeal is allowed-in-part and the award of the Tribunal is modified and an award is passed for Rs.1,85,000/- with proportionate costs before the Tribunal payable by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally with interest at 9% per annum on Rs.1,67,000/-, granted by the Tribunal, from the date of the petition till the date of realization and with interest at 7% per annum on Rs18,000/- enhanced by this Court. The enhanced amount shall be apportioned to all the claimants equally. The parties shall bear their own costs in this appeal. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. 8th July 2010 CVRK