IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.434 of 2008 Date:14.07.2011 Between: Billapati Laxmamma and 3 others. .....Appellants AND N. Kishore Kumar and another ....Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.434 of 2008 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the order and decree dated 13.03.2007 passed in M.V.O.P.No.347 of 2003 on the file of Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal (IV Additional District Judge, II F.T.C), Nalgonda, the present CMA is filed. The petitioners filed claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act, 1988 and Rules 455 of A.P.M.V. Rule, 1989 r/w Section 140 of M.V. Act before the Tribunal below claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of the death of Billapati Srinivasa Reddy, the husband of the 1st petitioner, son of 2nd petitioner and the father of 3rd petitioner in a motor vehicle accident. While evaluating both oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal below awarded total compensation of Rs.1,85,000/- to the petitioner against the respondents 1 and 2 holding that they are jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensation. The learned counsel appeared for the appellant mainly urged that though the petitioners filed Exs.A.6 and A.7 pattadar pass books and title deeds evidencing the lands owned by the deceased, Tribunal below awarded only meagre compensation fixing the income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per annum. He further urged that the Tribunal below erroneously applied multiplier –12 instead of multiplier 14 as per the guidelines laid down in Sarala Verma and others and Delhi Transport Corporation and others[1]. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company while supporting the order of the Tribunal below urged that as the petitioners failed to produce the income certificate of the deceased, the finding of the Tribunal below assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per annum is quite, just and reasonable. Now the point that arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation? The factum of the accident is not disputed. Admittedly the deceased is aged about 45 years as on the date of accident as per the postmortem report Ex.A.3. Exs.A.6 and A.7 are the pattadar pass books and title deeds of the deceased which reads that the deceased owned an extent of Ac.07-07 guntas and he is eaking out his livelihood on agriculture. Though there is no documentary proof of the earnings of the deceased, we can safely fix the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month while taking into consideration the documents Exs.A.6 and A.7. Therefore, the fixing of the income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- per annum by the Tribunal below is very meager and accordingly not sustainable. Hence, the income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.3,000/- per month which comes to Rs.36,000/- per year and out of the said amount after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses, the contribution to his family comes to a sum of Rs.24,000/-. Since the age of the deceased is noted as 45 years at the time of the death, the multiplier –14 would be applied as per the principles laid down in the decision cited above. Therefore, it comes to a sum of Rs.3,36,000/- (Rs.24,000/- X 14). The Tribunal in addition to the compensation granted, a sum of Rs.10,000/- was granted towards the consortium and Rs.15,000/- was granted towards the loss of estate. Accordingly, the total sum of Rs.3,61,000/- (Rupees three lakhs sixty one thousand only) is granted towards compensation to the appellants against the total compensation of Rs.1,85,000/- granted by the Tribunal below. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed granting compensation of Rs.3,61,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. In the circumstances, no costs. _________________ K.S.APPA RAO,J Date: 14th July, 2011. Gk THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.434 of 2008 Date: 14.07.2011 Gk. [1]( 2009) 6 SCC 121