IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.948 OF 2008 Between: Sunkari Shekar and anothes …Appellants A n d R.Sudershan and another ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.948 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order dated 11.12.2007 in O.P.No.918 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VIII Additional District Judge), Nizamabad (for short ‘the Tribunal), wherein the claim of the appellants herein was allowed-in-part, awarding compensation of Rs.2,63,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The appellants herein filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.7 lakhs for the death of the deceased Sukanthi Lakshmi, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 09.01.2003. The 1st claimant is the son and the 2nd claimant is the husband of the deceased. 4. The 2nd respondent herein opposed the claim. 5. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-8 were marked on behalf of the claimants. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondents, but Ex.B-1 copy of the policy was marked. 6. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal gave a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto bearing No.AP 15 V 4565 by its driver. The said finding has not been challenged by way of any appeal by the insurer. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2,63,000/-. Not satisfied with the award, the present appeal is filed seeking enhancement. 7. According to the claimants, the deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by beedi rolling work and also Rs.50,000/- per annum by cultivating the lands. The Tribunal found that the claimants have not adduced any evidence in support of the said claim. The Tribunal has rightly rejected the certificate Ex.A-6 said to have been issued by the Sarpanch regarding the income of the deceased, as the said Sarpanch was not competent to issue income certificate and he was also not examined. The Tribunal further rejected the claim of the appellants regarding the agricultural income as no particulars of the alleged cultivation of lands by the deceased were furnished. In the absence of any other evidence in support of the claim of the appellants regarding the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has estimated her income at Rs.2,000/- per month, which comes to Rs.24,000/- per annum and after deducting one-third thereof towards personal expenses, estimated the contribution of the deceased to the family at Rs.16,000/- per annum and applying the multiplier ‘16’ which is suitable to the age of the deceased, who was aged 35 years, estimated the loss of dependency at Rs.2,56,000/- . By awarding Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,63,000/-. 8. It is to be noted that the evidence on record established that the deceased was doing the work of beedi rolling which is admittedly a skilled work. The income taken by the Tribunal into consideration at Rs.2,000/- per month appears to be rather low, having regard to the fact that the deceased is a skilled labourer. It is considered just and reasonable to estimate the income of the deceased on the skilled wok turned out by her at Rs.100/- per day, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. Deducting one-third thereof towards personal expenses, the contribution to the family would come to Rs.24,000/- per annum. Applying the multiplier ‘16’, the loss of dependency works out to Rs.3,84,000/-. The claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate and the second claimant is entitled for Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, the total amount of compensation payable to the claimants works out to Rs.3,93,500/-. The claimants are entitled for interest on the said amount at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition on the original amount awarded by the Tribunal and at 6% per annum from the date of the appeal on the enhanced amount. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 9. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed as stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 19th August, 2011 Lrkm.