kbp 1 1648-96.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1648 OF 1996 Govind Laxman More and ors. ..Appellants Vs. 1. Office on Special Duty and Ex. Officio Dy. Development Commissioner and anr. ..Opposite Party 2. Government of Maharashtra .. Insurer ......... Mr.Sagar Joshi i/b.Mr.S.M.Oak, for appellant. Ms.S.V.Sonawane, AGP for respondent State. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 21st November, 2009. JUDGMENT : 1] The appeal is ready for final hearing and hence taken up for final hearing. 2] The appellants are the claimants who have taken an exception to the judgment and award dated 27th March, 1996 by which the claim petition filed by them under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act has been partly allowed. The claim was made on account of demise of the wife of the first appellant and mother of second and third appellants. The compensation of Rs.80,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 12% has been granted. The claim in this appeal is kbp 2 1648-96.sxw for enhancement of the compensation. 3] The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that considering the fact that the age of the deceased was 35 years, the income should have taken at a rate more than Rs.600/- per month for calculating the multiplicand, as the income would have certainly increased in the future. He submitted that the multiplier of 12 adopted by the Tribunal is on the lower side and the multiplier of 16 should be adopted. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the first appellant being husband of the deceased, the dependency should not have been taken at Rs.400/- per month and it should be taken at Rs.300/- per month. She submitted that the multiplier of 12 adopted by the tribunal is proper and no interference is called for. 4] I have given careful consideration to the submissions. As far as the calculation of multiplicand and application of appropriate multiplier is concerned, the law has been laid down by the apex Court in the recent case of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another [(2009) 6 SCC 121]. In the present case, in the absence of evidence as regards the actual income, considering the fact that the deceased was employed under an employment guarantee scheme as a labourer, the remuneration of Rs.600/- per annum has been taken as the income. In fact, under an employment guarantee scheme a person works for 20 to 24 days a month. Therefore, in the facts of the present case, there is no scope to take into account any possibility of increase in the kbp 3 1648-96.sxw income. Even assuming that the first appellant cannot be said to dependent, in view of what is held by the apex Court in paragraph 30 in the case of Sarla Verma (Supra), a deduction of 1/3 will have to be made. The Tribunal has rightly made a deduction of 1/3. As far as the multiplier is concerned, in the aforesaid decision, the apex Court has held that in case of deceased whose age was between 30 to 35 years, the multiplier will be 16. The calculation of multiplicand made by the Tribunal is correct, however, the multiplier will have to be increased to 16 years. The annual dependency will be Rs.4,800/- (Rs.400 X 12). Applying multiplier of 16, the compensation amount will be Rs.76,800 (Rs.4800 X 16). In addition to that, usual amount of Rs.20,000/- has been granted. Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs.96,800/-. A sum of Rs.80,000/- has been already granted. Thus the appellants are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.16,800/-. Considering the reduction in rates of interest, on the enhanced amount, interest at the rate of 7.5% will have to be granted. 5] Hence, I pass the following order:- (a) The impugned award is modified. In addition to the amount already granted, the appellants shall be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.16,800/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 7.5% per annum from 20th July, 1985 till the realisation or payment. (b) The appellants shall be entitled to proportionate costs of this appeal from the respondents. kbp 4 1648-96.sxw (c) Time of four months is granted to the respondents to comply with the modified award. (d) The additional compensation shall be deposited with the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall thereafter pass appropriate order regarding disbursement or withdrawal of the compensation. (e) Appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. ( A.S.OKA, J. )