1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.764 OF 1994 1. Smt.Suryaprabha Appasaheb Magdum, R/o.Mangaon, Tal.Hatkanangale, Dist.Kolhapur, 2. Kum.Jyoti Appasaheb Magdum, Age 14 years, Minor, through his mother appellant no.1. Appellants VERSUS 1. Mahadeo Tukaram Nakule, Age 64 years, R/o.Murgud, Tal.Hatkanangale, Dist.Kolhapur, 2. The General Manager, MSRTC, Mumbai. 3. International Insurance Fund, C/o.Secretary, MSRTC, Vahatuk Bhavan, Dr.Nair Road, Fort, Mumbai. 4. Ashok Anna Magdum, Age 45 years, R/o.Mangaon, Tal.Hatkanangale, Dist.Kolhapur. 5. Sau.Sunanda Kumar Kuntole, Age 41 years, R/o.Vasgade, Tal.Karvir, Dist.Kolhapur. 6. Sau.Akkatai Anna Magdum, Age 61 years, R/o.Mangaon. Tal.Hatkanangale, Dist.Kolhapur. Respondents Mr.T.S.Ingale for appellants. Mr.N.J.Patil for respondents 4 to 6 (org.petitioner nos.3A, 3B and 4) Mr.G.S.Hegade for respondent no.2. 2 CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 21st January 2010 PC :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the second respondent as well as fourth to sixth respondents. The appeal is filed by the original claimant nos.1 and 2 for enhancement in compensation awarded by the learned Member of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal in a claim petition filed by the appellants and the fourth to sixth respondents. The compensation was claimed on account of demise of husband of first appellant in an accident involving motor vehicle. The original claimants were the appellants and parents of the deceased. The father of the deceased died during pendency of the claim petition and fourth and fifth respondents were brought on record as his legal representatives. In the claim petition the claim for compensation of Rs.2.10 lakhs was made. Out of the said claim amount, by the impugned award, compensation of Rs.1.30 lakhs was awarded (inclusive of amount paid under no fault liability) together with interest thereon @ 12% p.a.. There is no challenge to the award by the contesting respondents. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi 3 Transport Corporation and another ([2009]6-SCC-121). He submitted that the multiplier applied is on the lower side. He submitted that the multiplicand calculated is also on the lower side. The learned counsel for the second respondent supported the impugned judgement and award by contending that no case for interference is made out as the compensation awarded is just and proper. 3. I have given careful consideration to the submissions. On the basis of certificate at Exhibit-22, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the total salary of the deceased on the date of accident was Rs. 1,127=95 Ps.. The certificate discloses that the deceased was employed as an Assistant Teacher in a recognized school. By virtue of statute, the employment of the deceased was protected. The finding of the Tribunal is that the age of the deceased was 32 years. In view of what is held by the Apex Court in paragraph 24 of the decision in case of Sarla Verma (supra), 50% of the net salary will have to be added to the net income for the purpose of calculating the multiplicand. The certificate at Exhibit-22 does not disclose the deductions from the salary. Therefore, the net salary can be conveniently taken at Rs.1,000/-. Adding 50% to it the income will have to be taken at Rs.1,500/- p.m.. In view of what is held in paragraph 30 in case of Sarla Verma (supra), one third amount will have to be deducted on account of personal expenditure of the 4 deceased. Thus, monthly dependency will be Rs.1,000/- and yearly dependency will be Rs.12,000/-. As the age of the deceased was 32 years, in terms of paragraph 42 of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma (supra), the multiplier of 16 will have to be adopted. Adopting the multiplier of 16, the compensation payable comes to Rs.1.92 lakhs. The Tribunal has granted usual amount of Rs.10,000/- on account of loss of company, pain and suffering. So the total compensation comes to Rs.2.02 lakhs which can be rounded off to Rs.2.00 lakhs. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to enhancement in the compensation. 4. In the recent past, the rates of interest of the nationalized banks have considerably reduced. Therefore, interest @ 7.5% p.a. will have to be granted on the enhanced amount. The other claimants namely respondent nos.4 and 5 have come on record as legal representatives of the father of the deceased. The respondent no.6 is the mother of the deceased. They have been given adequate share of the compensation under the impugned judgement and award. The second appellant must have attained majority. The additional compensation awarded under this judgement will have to be disbursed only to the appellants herein. 5. Hence, I pass following order :- 5 (A) In addition to the compensation awarded under the impugned award, the opponent nos.1 to 3 to the claim petition shall pay compensation of Rs.70,000/- (Rs.Seventy thousand only) to the appellants (original claimant nos.1 and 2) together with interest thereon @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till deposit of the said amount; (B) Time of four months is granted to deposit the additional compensation amount; (C) The appellants will be entitled to proportionate costs of the appeal from first to third respondents; (D) After additional amount is deposited, the Tribunal will pass appropriate order for disbursement of the amount to the appellants (first and second claimants); (E) The appeal is partly allowed in above terms; (F) Record and proceedings be sent to the Tribunal. (A.S.OKA, J.)