HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MACMA. No.2776 of 2007 and MACMA.No.764 of 2011 COMMON JUDGMENT: In MACMA.No.2776 of 2007, the Insurance Company questioned O.P.No.928 of 2005, dated 05.12.2006 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereas MACMA(SR).No.55715 of 2007 is filed against the very same O.P. by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation. While the deceased and others were travelling in auto bearing No. AP 23U 2666 on 13.02.2005, the tanker bearing No.AAK 3609 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came in the opposite direction on the wrong side and collided with the auto. It turned turtle and after sustaining serious injuries, the injured died on the way to hospital. A Crime was registered by the police as Ex.A.1, first information report, on the report of the auto driver, PW.2. Ex.A.2, the charge sheet, was filed against the driver of the tanker. The deceased, who claimed to be aged about 19 years and working in STD booth, Sai Communications, is stated to have been earning Rs.3,000/- p.m. The claimants were stated to be totally depending on him and, hence, they claimed a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. The Insurance Company contested the claim denying the allegations of the claimants and any rash or negligent driving by its driver. The Tribunal framed issues about the rashness and negligence in driving the crime vehicle and the entitlement of the claimants to the compensation. The claimants examined PWs.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.6. On behalf of the Insurance Company, RW.1 was examined and got marked Exs.B.1 and B.2 and Ex.X.1. The Tribunal rendered the impugned order leading to the award under appeal firstly accepting the claim of PW.2 corroborated by Ex.A.1, first information report, and Ex.A.2, charge sheet and concluded that in the absence of any contrary evidence, the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the offending tractor. Coming to the quantum of compensation, as there was no proof to the effect that the deceased was earning Rs.3,000/- p.m. by running STD booth, the Tribunal took his annual earnings as Rs.15,000/- and assessed the loss of dependency at Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.10,000/- for shock and agony and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all a total compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- was awarded payable with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization and proportionate costs. Learned Counsel for the claimants contended that though their claim petition was for Rs.4.00 lakhs, the Tribunal had wrongly taken the earnings of the deceased and even the multiplier applied was on the lower side. Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company, submits that since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% has to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses. He further contended that the second claimant could not be considered as a dependant and the mother alone has to be treated as a dependant. PW.2, an auto driver, deposed that there was negligence on the driver of the offending tanker. However, his evidence stood unrebutted by not examining the driver of the offending tanker. Therefore, the conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending tanker has become final. In so far as determination of compensation is concerned, as per Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation[1], 50 per cent has to be deducted towards the personal and living expenses of a bachelor. The Tribunal was justified, in the absence of any document that the deceased was running STD booth and earning Rs.3,000/- p.m., in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- p.a. since the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) itself presumes even non-earning persons to be earning Rs.15,000/- p.a. as per second schedule. If so, on an assessed contribution of Rs.15,000/- p.a., the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘15’ and since the deceased was a bachelor, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.1,12,500/- (Rs.15,000 x 15 x 50%). As per Sarla Verma (1 supra), the dependents were also entitled to Rs.10,000/- each towards loss of estate and love and affection in addition to Rs.10,000/- for shock and agony and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,44,500/-. MACMA.No.2776 of 2007 filed by the Insurance Company is allowed and the MACMA.No.764 of 2011 filed by the claimants is dismissed. GHULAM MOHAMMED,J Date:31.03.2011 usd [1] 2009 ACJ 1298