1 fa630-10 agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.630 OF 2010 Thane Municipal Transport Undertaking, Through the Transport Manager, T.M.T. ..Appellant. Versus Mr.Emilian Peter Periera & Others ..Respondents. Mr.Mandar Limaye for the appellant. Mr.Suresh Padwal for respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : B.H. Marlapalle, & U.D. Salvi, JJ. DATE : 4th October, 2010. P.C. : (Per U.D. Salvi, J.) Heard. Perused the record and proceedings. 2. The only challenge in the present appeal, as submitted by the learned Advocate Mr.Mandar Limaye for the appellant, is to the quantum of compensation of Rs.19,07,748/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thane in Motor Accident Claims Petition NO.590 of 2006 on 5th March 2009. According to him, the facts leading to the Claim Petition are not in dispute. The victim Dolloroja, Assistant Teacher working with Thane Municipal Corporation, wife of the Respondent No.1 – Mr.Emilian Peter 2 fa630-10 Pereira died in the accident at about 12.30 p.m. on 2nd May 2006 while she was traveling through a bus belonging to the Thane Municipal Transport Undertaking and at the material time, she was drawing a home take salary of Rs.15,659.10 (Salary of Rs.18,189/- per month) vide salary certificate at Exhibit 25 and was 44 years old then. She was working as an assistant teacher in a school run by the Thane Municipal Corporation and was continued in service and entitled for revision of salary as effected from time- to-time. 3. Perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that the learned Claims Tribunal did take into consideration the said relevant facts disclosed in the evidence, and after deducting as personal expenses one third of the said salary from total salary had computed a sum of Rs.12,133/- as a loss of contribution of the deceased to her family per month. The learned Claims Tribunal had further taken 13 as a multiplier considering the age of the deceased as revealed through the service book Exhibit 44 and computed the loss of dependency at Rs.18,92,748/- by multiplying the annual loss of dependency Rs.1,45,596/- with the multiplier 13. P.W. 13 Smt. _ Mangal Bhoir proved the salary certificate (Exhibit 25) 4. Brake up of the total compensation payable to the Claimants has been shown at para 22 of the impugned judgment, as under : 3 fa630-10 a) towards loss of dependency Rs.18,92,748/- b) towards charges of transportation of dead body Rs. 2,000/- c) towards expenses on last rites Rs. 3,000/- d) towards consortium Rs. 10,000/- -------------------- Total Compensation : Rs.19,07,748/- ======== This computation has been done with reference to the second schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is also pertinent to note that the number of casualties were more and claim applications filed by other claimants were also allowed and the appellant did not challenge any of these awards. 5. The learned Advocate Mr.Limaye for the appellant was at loss to point out any patent flaw, legal and/or factual, in computation of the compensation done by the learned Claims Tribunal with reference to the facts clearly revealed in the evidence. No merit is seen in the present appeal. 6. The appeal is, therefore, rejected with no order as to costs. (U.D. Salvi, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle, J.)