THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA M.A.C.M.A.No.364 of 2005 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimants against the order dated 9.11.2004 in O.P. No. 914 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Jude, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, whereby and whereunder the claimants were awarded compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- as against the claim of Rs.3,00,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as they were arrayed in the O.P. 3. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal can be summarized as follows: That on 9.8.2001, the second respondent who is the owner of the offending Tractor-Trailor bearing registration No. AHF 3461/3462 instructed the deceased to take labourers to his fields to cut and to bring green grass for his cattle. Accordingly, the deceased and other labourers travelled in the offending Tractor and Trailor and they were accompanied by sickles, ropes, baskets and other agricultural implements. When the Tractor-Trailor reached near Vedurumudi culvert, the first respondent-driver of the Tractor-Trailor driven it in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed and as a result, it turned turtle and fell in the canal and the deceased, who was sitting by the side of the first respondent-driver, sustained grievous injuries. The deceased was immediately taken to a private Nursing Home at Mandapeta. As the condition of the deceased was serious, he was shifted to Suraksha Hospital, Rajahmundry, where he succumbed to the injuries on 16.8.2001. The deceased is the son of the fourth petitioner and the second respondent. The first petitioner is his wife. Petitioners 2 and 3 are his minor daughters. The deceased was aged about 30 years at the time of his death in the accident. He was doing cultivation work and was self-employed earning about Rs.3,000/- per month. He was working under his father who is the second respondent. 4. The first respondent remained exparte. Though, the second respondent entered appearance, he did not choose to file counter. The third respondent-insurance company filed counter denying the petition averments and put the petitioners to strict proof thereof. It is further stated that the deceased was earning not more than Rs.40/- to 50/- per day as agricultural labourer; that the insurer is not liable to answer the claim as the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and that the petitioners are not entitled to any interest on the award amount. 5. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of both sides, framed the issues as to the rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1- driver of the Tractor/Trailer bearing No. AHF 3461/3462 causing the death of the deceased, and as to the petitioners’ dependency on the deceased and their entitlement to claim compensation with interest at 12% per annum. 6. On behalf of the claimants, PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked, whereas no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked on behalf of the respondents, except marking the copy of the insurance policy of the Tractor-Tralor as Ex.B.1 by consent. 7 . After taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1- driver of the Tractor-Trailor; that respondents 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation; that the deceased was 30 years’ old at the time of the accident and that his monthly earnings were 1500/-which came to Rs.18,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd therefrom towards personal expenses of the deceased, the annual dependency arrived at Rs.12,000/-. The same was calculated with appropriate multiplier ‘17’ and thus total dependency was arrived at Rs.2,04,000/-. Since the petitioners claimed Rs.1,75,000/- towards loss of dependency, the Tribunal restricted the loss of dependency at Rs.1,75,000/-. In addition thereto, the Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses and transport to the hospital, Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony, pain and suffering and loss of love and affection and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, a total compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- was awarded with interest at 6% per annum. 8. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the present appeal is preferred by the claimants. 9. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the record. 10. It is to be seen that the petitioners claimed Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and pain and suffering and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection, but the Tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/-under those two heads without assigning any reasons. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the opinion that the amount awarded by the Tribunal under those heads is meagre and the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.30,000/- which is just and reasonable. Though the petitioners claimed Rs.25,000/- towards loss of consortium to the first petitioner, the Tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/-, which in the opinion of this court is on the lower side. As such, this court is of the opinion that another Rs.5,000/- may be added making the amount Rs.10,000/-towards loss of consortium, which is just and reasonable. This court is also of the opinion that an amount of Rs.5,000/- may also be awarded towards funeral expenses, which is just and reasonable. 11. In the circumstances, it is to be held that the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2, 85,000/-(Rupees two lakhs eighty five thousand) only, (i.e. Rs.1,75,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses and transport to the hospital, Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony and pain and suffering and loss of love and affection, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses) with interest at 6% per annum. 12. With the above modification, the M.A.C.M.A. is disposed of. _________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J 24-9-2010 Stp