HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.398 OF 2001 DATED: 04.03.2010 BETWEEN: K.L.Narasimha Reddy and another .. Appellant And Smt P.Ramalakshmamma and another .. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.398 OF 2001 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the order, dated 25.09.1998 in M.V.O.P.No.726 of 1997 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Kurnool. 2. This is an appeal filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of the death of his wife in an motor vehicle accident occurred on 04.07.1996, wherein the car bearing No.AP 7 C 2344 belonging to the first respondent, insured with the second respondent was involved. The learned Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.70,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. 3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent-insurance company. 4. Since the quantum of compensation is the subject matter of the present appeal, the other aspects need not be gone into. The deceased, the wife of the appellant was aged 29 years on the date of accident, was an agricultural labourer. As per the version of the appellant, the deceased was getting Rs.30/- per day by working as a labourer. But, the learned Tribunal granted compensation only under no fault liability which was provided under Section 140 of the M.V. Act adding other conventional sums and ordered total compensation of Rs.70,000/-. The appellant contends that the amount granted by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate and not just and reasonable which deserves to be enhanced in this appeal. 5. Even if the deceased was considered to be non-earning person, her income can be taken as Rs.15,000/- per annum as provided in the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. From this, if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal and living expenses, the amount comes to Rs.10,000/-. The relevant multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased as per the judgment in SARALA VARMA AND OTHERS v DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1] is 17. To arrive at the loss of dependency, the amount has to be capitalized with the multiplier 17, which comes to Rs.10,000/- x 17 = Rs.1,70,000/-. This apart, the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all the appellant is entitled for compensation of Rs.1,90,000/-. This Court can grant compensation over and above the actual amount claimed, if it is just and reasonable. Therefore, the appellant is granted total compensation of Rs.1,90,000/-. However, the interest being on higher side, is reduced from 12% per annum to 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. The enhancement, therefore, would be Rs.1,90,000/- minus Rs.70,000/- = Rs.1,20,000/-. 6. With the above enhancement in the compensation and reduction in the rate of interest, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Dated: 04.03.2010 Kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.398 OF 2001 DATED: 04.03.2010 [1] 2009(2) L.S. 29 (S.C.)