IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THIS THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1728 of 2004 Between United India Insurance Co. Ltd., rep. by its Divisional Manager …APPELLANT(S) A N D Bokka Padma and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1728 of 2004 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Aggrieved by the order and decree, dated 20.02.2004, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge) at Khammam (for brevity “the Tribunal”), in M.A.T.O.P.No.1311 of 2001, awarding a sum of Rs.8,47,000/- towards compensation with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation, for the death of Bokka Srinivasa Rao (hereinafter referred to as – ‘the deceased) in a road accident that occurred on 16.01.2001, the insurer-United India Insurance Company Limited has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 3. Appellant herein is the insurer, respondent Nos.1 to 4 are the claimants/legal heirs of the deceased, 5th respondent is the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Oil Tanker, and 6th respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle. 4. The particulars regarding the manner in which the accident took place are not referred to herein as they are not in dispute. 5. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, awarded a sum of Rs.8,47,000/- towards compensation to the claimants for the death of the deceased in the accident. 6. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified? 7. I have carefully gone through the impugned award, passed by the Tribunal. It is observed that the claimants claimed a total compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal, having elaborately dealt with all the aspects, including the age and income of the deceased and taking into consideration the nature of injuries and number of injuries suffered by the claimant and the duration of treatment, came to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled to Rs.8,17,000/- towards loss of earnings, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, and awarded a total compensation of Rs.8,47,000/-. 8. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the reasons recorded by the Tribunal, while granting the compensation, and there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order and the same does not call for any interference by this Court. 9. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 9% per annum is slightly on higher side. Therefore, the same is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. In all other aspects and respects, the impugned order and decree shall remain unaltered. 10. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part, to the extent indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _________________ D.S.R.VARMA, J 05th AUGUST 2010 CVRK