THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD M.A. C.M.A. No. 110 of 2008 and Cross-Objections Oral Judgment: (Per N.V. Ramana, J.) This appeal by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., is directed against the judgment dated 29.09.2007, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, awarding compensation of Rs.11,78,000/- to the respondents-claimants, as against their claim for Rs.20,40,000/-, contending that the same is on the higher side and needs reduction. On 20.12.2005, at about 4.00 p.m., while the deceased Dayanand, was on his way to Shamshabad, a DCM van bearing registration No. AP 9x 4701, belonging to respondent No.5, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the scooter of the deceased. The deceased succumbed to the injuries sustained by him while he was being taken to Osmania General Hospital. Therefore, claiming compensation for his death, his wife and two children, who are respondent Nos. 1 to 3, filed claim petition before the Tribunal contending that the deceased was working as Police Constable and at the time of his death in the accident, he was aged 43 years and was earning monthly salary of Rs.11,353/- per month, and as such, they are entitled to compensation of Rs.20,40,000/-. The appellant-Insurance Company contested the claim of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 inter alia contending that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess driving licence, the deceased rode his scooter in a rash and negligent manner and the compensation claimed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 is exorbitant. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in support of their claim, examined P.Ws. 1 and 2 and marked Exs. A1 to A12, while the appellant examined none, but marked Ex. B1. The Tribunal taking into consideration the net salary of the deceased at Rs.11,253/- per month and considering the fact that the deceased had 15 years of left service, fixed the salary of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month, however, it had fixed his average annual income at Rs.1,56,000/- and deducted Rs.6,000/- towards income tax liability, and thus fixed his annual income at Rs.1,50,000/-. From the said amount, the Tribunal deducted one-third towards personal expenses of the deceased and took his contribution to the family at Rs.1,00,000/- per annum and by applying the multiplier of 11.43 arrived the loss of dependency at Rs.11,43,000/- and further awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- to respondent No.1-claimant towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,000/- to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 claimants towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus in all, the Tribunal awarded Rs.11,78,000/- to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 claimants and made the appellant and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 liable to pay the compensation. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company and the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3- claimants and perused the judgment under appeal. The contention of the appellant-Insurance Company that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to respondent Nos.1 to 3- claimants is on the higher side cannot be accepted. As can be seen from the evidence and the material placed before the Tribunal and the judgment under appeal, the deceased, who is the husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, was working as a Constable in the Traffic Wing of the Police Department. At the time of his death, he was aged 43 years, and had 15 years of service. The deceased was drawing an income of Rs.11,353/- per month as is evident from Ex. A7-salary certificate. He was paying Rs.100/- towards professional tax. Thus he was getting an income is Rs.11,253/- per month. The deceased, as noted above, was aged 43 years at the time of his death. In Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation[1], the Apex Court held that if the age of the deceased was 40 to 50 years, there should be an addition of 30% of actual salary to the actual salary. As the deceased was aged 43 years and had 15 years of service, 30% of the actual salary should be added to the actual salary, and thus added, his monthly income would come to Rs. 14,629/-, and his annual income would work out to Rs.1,75,548/-. The Tribunal observed that upto Rs.1,00,000/- there is no tax liability. Therefore, if the balance amount of Rs.75,548/- is subjected to tax, the deceased would have paid Rs.7,500/- towards tax. Thus, his annual income would work out to Rs. 1,68,048/-. In the very same judgment, the Apex Court held that if the deceased had two to three dependants, one-third of the salary should be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. As the deceased had three dependants, namely respondent Nos. 1 to 3-claimants, one-third of his salary should be deducted towards his personal expenses, and thus deducted from his annual salary, the loss of dependency to the family would work out to Rs. 1,12,032/-. As per the very same judgment of the Apex Court, the multiplier applicable to a person aged between 41 to 45 years is 14. As the deceased at the time of his death was aged 43 years, the relevant multiplier applicable is 14. By application of the said multiplier to the amount of Rs.1,12,032/- which is his actual contribution to the family, the compensation payable to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 would work out to Rs.15,68,448/-. To the said amount, compensation towards loss of consortium to the wife, loss of estate and funeral expenses has to be added. The Tribunal granted Rs.15,000/-, Rs.15,000/- and Rs.5,000/- under the said heads. As per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, the compensation under the said heads has to be reduced to Rs.10,000/-, Rs.10,000/- and Rs.2,500/-, and accordingly the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the said heads is reduced to Rs.10,000/-, Rs.10,000/- and Rs.2,500/-. Thus, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 would be entitled to compensation of Rs.15,90,948/-. The Tribunal awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum on the compensation awarded from the date of petition till the date of realization. Though the same, as per the above judgment of the Apex Court has to be reduced to 6%, but we are not inclined to do so, having regard to the inflation that prevailed during the time. However, we deem it appropriate to award interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of filing of appeal till the date of realization, and accordingly do so. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed and the cross-objections filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 to the extent indicated above are allowed. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. ____________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J. Dated: 8th August, 2011 KSR [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121