THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 3484 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the insurance company against the order dated 07.02.2005 in M.V.O.P.No.926 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Khammam. The petitioners, who are the parents and sister of the deceased Battu Venkataiah, filed the claim petition for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. According to the claim of the petitioners, on 18.02.2000 when the deceased was proceeding in a tractor-trailer, a lorry bearing No.AP-16-W-4100 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the tractor-trailer, as a result of which the deceased received injuries and died. The deceased was said to be aged 30 years and he was unmarried and earning as a labourer and looking after the agriculture. The respondents 1 and 2 are said to be the driver and owner of the lorry and 3rd respondent, who is the appellant herein, is the insurer. The respondents 4 and 5 are the owner and driver of tractor-trailer and the 6th respondent is the insurer. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.1,82,000/- and fastened the liability on the appellant herein and so far as the respondents 4 are 5, who are the owner and driver of the tractor is concerned, the application against them was dismissed. Challenging the said award, the present appeal is filed. The point for consideration is whether the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is legal and sustainable? POINT: The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the determination of the income by the lower Tribunal and the application of the multiplier are not proper. Evidently, there is no proof of income of the deceased and the lower Tribunal has only adopted the standard income under schedule-II. This being an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is not possible to apply the income determined under schedule-II. Therefore, being a labourer and coolie, the income of the deceased would have been only fixed at Rs.1,800/-. Out of it, since the deceased is unmarried, half of the income has to be deducted towards his personal expenditure. Therefore, the contribution annually comes to Rs.10,800/- (Rs.900/- x 12). Since the deceased was unmarried, the multiplier that would be applicable will be determined on the basis of the age of the mother of the deceased. Since the age of the mother is said to be above 45 years, the multiplier that would be applied is ‘14’. The total dependency comes to Rs.1,51,200/- (Rs.10,800/- x 14). The petitioners will be entitled to non- pecuniary damages at Rs.5,000/-. Therefore, the total compensation comes to Rs.1,56,200/-(Rupees one lakh fifty six thousand two hundred only). The petitioners will be entitled to interest at 7.5% instead of 9% as granted by the lower Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 27-12-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 3484 of 2011 DATE: 27-12-2011 MR