THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.3035 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the petitioners- claimants, against the judgment and decree of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Medak at Sangareddy, in O.P.No.553 of 1999, dated 22.06.2001. 2. Heard. 3. The brief facts are as follows: The petitioners-claimants are the wife, children and parents of the deceased Balamallu, who died in a motor vehicle accident on 01.07.1998, while he was going on a moped at 4.00 p.m. near a Beedi Factory on Siddipet - Ramayampet road, the lorry bearing No.MWN/1799 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased. The deceased was said to be earning Rs.3,000/- per month by running idli centre. Petitioners claimed compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs. 4. The first respondent remained exparte and the second respondent filed counter denying the allegations. 5. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the claimants proved the accident dated 01.07.1998 committed by the driver of R-1 and the vehicle of R-1 was insured with R-2 during the relevant period? 2. Whether the claimants are entitled for compensation as claimed for? 3. To what relief? 6. On behalf of the petitioners, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A.6 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence was adduced, however, Ex.B1 copy of policy was marked. On the basis of the material on record, the court below granted compensation of Rs.1,29,200/- holding that the accident has taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle, and thus, the petitioners are entitled for compensation. The court below fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.1000/- per month, and after deducting 1/3rd, the contribution comes to Rs.650/- per month and Rs.7,800/- per annum. Applying multiplier ‘14’ basing on the age of the deceased, granted the compensation of Rs.1,29,200/- as stated above with interest at 9% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 7. Now, the only question that has to be decided is with regard to the quantum of compensation. 8. There appears to be no serious dispute about the profession of the deceased. He was said to be running idli centre. The inquest report- the document that was immediately drafted after the accident, shows that the deceased was running idli centre. Ex.A6 a receipt issued by the local authority shows that the deceased was running idli centre at Vysya Bank. At the time of accident, he was going on a two wheeler. In case, he was having two wheeler in the year 1998, it can be accepted that he had definitely income of more than Rs.1000/- a month, which is taken into consideration by the Court below. The income of the deceased can be definitely taken at Rs.15000/- per annum. From out of which Rs.3,750/- was deducted being 1/4th towards personal expenses as the dependants are more than ‘4’, the net contribution would be taken at Rs.11,750/- per annum and appropriate multiplier would be ‘16’. Thus, towards loss of dependency, the petitioners are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- even without adding anything towards enhancement of future income of the deceased and another amount of Rs.20,000/- can be awarded towards non-pecuniary damages. Thus, the petitioners would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs claimed. However, the rate of interest shall be at 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of petition till the date of payment. 9. C.M.A. is accordingly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.1,29,200/- to Rs.2,00,000/-. 30% of the enhanced compensation can be withdrawn immediately and the remaining after two years thereafter. No order as to costs. ___________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. Date: 23.11.2010 Rns