THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CMA.No.1462 of 1997 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah. The claimants/appellants herein are the wife, two minor children and the parents of the deceased. They filed O.P.No.863 of 1995, on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar (for short “the Tribunal”) under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the Act”) claiming the compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- on account of death of the deceased in an accident. The deceased Kumar Ramachandran was a Chartered Accountant working with the Genious Financial Services Limited. While he was traveling in the Car bearing No.AP-9J 782 from Vijayawada towards Hyderabad on 24-8-1995, met with an accident by reason of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry bearing No.ADM/4212, which came in the opposite direction in a wrong side and dashed against the car of the deceased, as a result of which, he sustained multiple bleeding injuries. He was shifted to Kamineni Hospital where he was treated and during the treatment he died on 1-9-1995. He was a qualified Chartered Accountant and at the time of accident he was working with the Genious Financial Services Limited and previously he worked in various organizations like V.S.T Industries in India and abroad in different senior capacities. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence held that the deceased Kumar Ramachandran died in an accident that occurred on 24-8-1995 at 9-00 a.m near Sanghinagar Road National High Way No.9 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry Bearing No.ADM/4212 which was insured with the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company covering the risk against the third party. As against the said finding of the Tribunal neither the Insurance Company nor the owner of the aforesaid lorry filed any appeal. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.18.92,200/- which includes Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation? Though it was the contention of the appellants that the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs.25,000/- per month as on the date of his death and was aged 35 years, his salary was taken as Rs.15,000/- per month. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that even according to Ex.A12 his monthly salary was Rs.18,000/- apart from H.R.A of Rs.7,200/- and his total earning was Rs.25,200/-. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to accept the salary of Rs.15,000/- as fixed by the Tribunal. Insofar as future prospects are concerned, as per the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation[1], for a Government employee, whose age is between 40 to 50 years, an additional 30% of the monthly income has to be added. Insofar as a private employee is concerned, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company vs. Surinder Kaur And Others[2] in respect of a milk vendor directed to add additional 30% of the monthly income for future prospects. Therefore, we are inclined to add 30% of Rs.15,000/-, the monthly income of the deceased, towards future prospects, which comes to Rs.4,500/- and after adding Rs.4,500/, his total income comes to Rs.19,500/- per month. Insofar as deduction towards personal expenses is concerned, the Tribunal deducted 1/3rd of his income. As per the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Supra 1), if the defendants are 5 in number, 1/4th amount has to be deducted towards personal expenses and 1/4th of Rs.19,500/- being Rs.4,875/- is deducted from Rs.19,500/-, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.14,625/- and per annum it comes to Rs.1,75,500/- (Rs.14,625/- x 12). At the time of death the age of the deceased was 35 years and therefore the appropriate multiplier that would be applicable as per Sarla Verma (Supra 1) is 16 and if the same is applied, the loss of dependency would come to Rs.28,08,000/- (Rs.1,75,500/- x 16). Apart from that, the 1st respondent wife is also entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses as awarded by the Tribunal. The claimants are also entitled to Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total compensation for which the appellants/claimants are entitled would come to Rs.29,33,000/- (Rs.28,08,000/- + 15,000/- + 1,00,000/- + 5,000/- + 5,000/-) payable jointly and severally by the respondents along with 7% interest per annum. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part granting compensation of Rs.29,33,000/- to the appellants/claimants payable jointly and severally by the respondents with interest at 7% per annum from the date filing the petition till the date of realization. No costs. _________________ (V.ESWARAIAH,J) __________________ (R.KANTHA RAO,J) Date:19-12-2012 grk THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO (The Judgment of the Bench delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) CMA.No.1462 of 1997 Dated: 19-12-2012 [1] (2009 (6) SCALE 129) [2] 2012 6 SCC 421