IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.Nos.459 OF 2008 & 2022 OF 2011 M.A.C.M.A.No.459 OF 2008 Between: The New India Assurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Innispeta, Rajahmundry …Appellant A n d K.Surya Nagamanai and others ..Respondents A N D M.A.C.M.A.No.2022 OF 2011 K.Surya Nagamanai and others …Appellants A n d Birendra Pradhan and two others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.Nos.459 OF 2008 & 2022 OF 2011 COMMON JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. Perused the record. 2. These appeals arise out of the judgment dated 24.09.2007 in O.P.No.440 of 2005, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), East Godavari, Rajahmundry (for short ‘the Tribunal), wherein the said application filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation of Rs.10 lakhs, was allowed, awarding compensation of Rs.3,70,500/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition. 3. Aggrieved by the said award, the insurer filed M.A.C.M.A.No.459 of 2008 and claiming enhancement of compensation, the claimants preferred M.A.C.M.A.No.2022 of 2011. 4. The only contention raised by both parties in the two appeals is regarding the quantum of compensation. The deceased was stated to be aged 35 years at the time of accident and was owner of an auto and plying the same. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal has taken the age of the deceased as 35 years regarding which there is no dispute raised in the appeals. The claimants filed Exs.A-6 to A-9 viz., copy of permit issued by the RTA for plying the auto, bunch of receipts showing payments to the finance company, loan clearance certificate issued by the financier and driving licence issued by the licencing authority. Exs.A-6 to A-9 only show that the deceased was owning an auto and was plying the same. There is, however, no other evidence to show the income the deceased was deriving by plying the auto. In the absence of any such evidence, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- per month, which comes to Rs.30,000/- per annum, which is considered to be just and reasonable, in the absence of any evidence to the contra. The deceased has left behind five dependants who are claimants. As per the decision of the Apex Court in SARLA VERMA & OTHERS V. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1], when the number of dependants exceeds four, the amount towards personal expenses to be deducted from the income would be one-fourth. When it is so deducted, the contribution of the deceased to the family would come to Rs.22,500/- per annum. As per the same decision, the appropriate multiplier suitable to the age of the deceased, who was 35 years, is ‘16’ and applying the same, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.3,60,000/-. As per the above decision, the claimants should be entitled for Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and the 1st claimant would be entitled for Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for a total compensation of Rs.3,80,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 5. In the result, M.A.C.M.A.No.459 of 2008 filed by the insurer is dismissed and M.A.C.M.A.No.2022 of 2011 filed by the claimants is allowed to the extent stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 15th September, 2011 Lrkm. [1] 2009(3) ALD 83 (SC)