HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.3923 OF 2003 Dated: 23.04.2010 BETWEEN: K.Kavitha . Appellant And The APSRTC,rep.by its MD and another .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.3923 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the award, dated 24.08.2001 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Additional Chief Judge), City Civil Court, Secunderabad in O.P.No.112 of 2000. 2. The appellant is the wife and the second respondent is the mother of the deceased K.Vinod Kumar Goud, who was aged 33 years on the date of accident and said to be working as accountant in Gouda Samkshema Sahakara Sangham, a private society and his income was said to be Rs.4,050/- per month. The appellant and second respondent claimed compensation of Rs.6 lakhs, against which the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.3,32,200/-. 3. Challenge in this appeal is to the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal on the ground that it is not just and reasonable and requires to be enhanced. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent- APSRTC. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that though PW.2, Mallesh Goud, who was the President of the said Gouda Sangham at relevant point of time was examined and Ex.A.5-salary certificate was proved through him, the learned Tribunal without accepting the said evidence erroneously considered the income of the deceased at Rs.2400/- per month for the purpose of computing compensation. According to the learned counsel, the Tribunal ought to have accepted the income of the deceased as Rs.4,050/- per month. The learned Tribunal mentioned in its order that the appellant has not produced any documents relating to affairs of the society and therefore, no reliance could be placed on Ex.A.5 salary certificate and also on the evidence of PW.2. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the light of the evidence forthcoming, I am of the view that the Tribunal is justified in not placing reliance totally on the evidence of PW.2 and the documents i.e. Ex.A.5 salary certificate. However, the fact remains that the deceased was working as Secretary in the said Gouda Sangham and even if the evidence of PW.2 is not accepted in toto, in my considered view, the learned Tribunal keeping in view that the accident occurred in the year 2000 ought to have considered the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month for the purpose of computing compensation. The monthly income of the deceased is Rs.3,000/-, and his annual incomes to Rs.3,000/- x 12 = Rs.36,000/-. From this, 1/3rd i.e. Rs.12,000/- has to be deducted for his personal and living expenses and his contribution to the family comes to Rs.24,000/- per annum. The multiplier 16 was rightly applied by the learned Tribunal considering the age of the deceased as 33 years. To arrive at the loss of dependency, the amount has to be multiplied with 16 i.e. Rs.24,000/- x 16 = Rs.3,84,000/-. This apart, the appellant who is the widow of the deceased is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and the appellant and the second respondent are entitled for an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and a further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the appellant and the second respondent are entitled for total compensation of Rs.3,84,000/- + Rs.10,000/- + Rs.5,000/- + Rs.5,000/- = Rs.4,04,000/-. Therefore, the enhancement would be Rs.4,04,000/- - Rs.3,32,200/- = Rs.71,800/-. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. 7. With the above enhancement in the compensation, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Dated: 23.04.2010 Kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO.3923 OF 2003 Dated: 23.04.2010