THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO C.M.A.No. 940 of 2003 JUDGMENT Aggrieved against the order and decree dated 24.6.1999 in O.P.No. 3 of 1996 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Nalgonda, the present C.M.A. is filed. The counsel appearing for the appellant urged that the Court below erred in granting only Rs. 1,07,280 against the claim of Rs. 8,00,000/- towards the compensation by applying the multiplier 9.34 instead of the multiplier 20 and the lower Court ought to have granted Rs. 30,000/- towards the pain and suffering besides Rs. 30,000/- towards the loss of consortium. Now the point for consideration is whether the Order of the lower Court is sustainable and the Petitioner -appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation? As seen from the impugned order, it was held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending lorry belongs to the 1st respondent which was insured with the 2nd respondent under valid coverage. For assessment of compensation in injury claims, the age of the claimant, multiplier applicable to the case, earning capacity of the injured and percentage of the disability are the relevant factors. 1st appellant is the wife, appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are the children of the deceased Vooturu Bixam Reddy. Respondents did not disputed the accident and the legal representatives of Vootkuru Bixam Reddy. The counsel appearing for the appellant while placing reliance on a recent decision reported in SARALA VERMA (SMT) AND OTHERS Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND OTHERS[1] and urged that the multiplier to be applied by following the aforesaid decision and requested for enhancement of compensation. As seen from the aforesaid decision, His Lordships have observed that basically three facts need to be established by the claimants for assessing the compensation in case of death i.e. (a) age of the deceased, (b) income of the deceased, and (c) proof of dependants. Further, the issues to be determined by the tribunal to arrive at the loss of dependency are (1) additions/deductions to be made for arriving at the income of the deceased, (2) the deduction to be made towards the personal living expenditure of the deceased and (3) the multiplier to be applied with reference to the age of the deceased. Therefore, as per the said decision of the apex Court for ascertaining the multiplicand, the income of the deceased should be determined. As per the evidence on record, the deceased was working as Deputy Forest Ranger and was drawing a salary of Rs. 5,184/- per month. Ex. A-2 is the salary certificate, where-under, it is mentioned that in September, 1995 i.e. the month in which the deceased died, the salary was Rs.5,184/-. Having regard to the age of the deceased, as per Ex.A-2 postmortem certificate he was aged 47 years. The multiplier should be chosen from the table with reference to the age of the deceased. The appropriate multiplier is 13 in the present case on hand. As per the guidelines in the aforesaid decision, the deduction towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased should be 1/4th, where the dependants of the family are four to six members. Deducting 1/4th of the salary i.e. Rs. 1,296/- for his personal expenses, his contribution to the family can be put at Rs. 3,888/-(Rs. 5,184/- - Rs.1,296/-) and contribution to his family will be Rs. 3,888/- in which event, his contribution to the family comes to Rs. 46,656/- p.a. (Rs. 3,888/- x 12) and applying 13 multiplier, the amount comes to Rs. 6,06,528/- (Rs. 46,656/- x 13). Therefore, by applying the guidelines in the aforesaid decision, relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant, the amount of compensation arrived by the lower Court while applying the multiplier 9.34 for Rs. 3,92,280/-is enhanced to Rs. 6,06,58/-. While confirming the order of the lower Court granting a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards the consortium in the circumstances of the case on hand. Therefore, granted a compensation of Rs. 6,06,528/- and a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards the consortium totaling to Rs. 6,21,528/- against the compensation of Rs. 4,07,280/- awarded in the impugned order. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of O.P. before the tribunal till realization. With this modification, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ 4.3.2011 CHV [1] 2009(6) S.C.C. 121